Survey Comments
I think its been long overdue, you want too use cw use it no one is stopping you ,dont hold others back just cause of old world ways i think its crap.Lets move into the new world with positive regards to those who are intrested in radio .botherhood still can be had if we can move along in a foward direction.stop the winning and help promote good radio practices and let dead dogs lie.Put on your no whinners shirt, and lets have more enjoyment wath the radio and a little more consideration for those who are intrested in becoming top notch.there is nothing that will be gained in all the bitching,and moaning get over it and move foward.just my opinion and yes I said it all.KC9JQT.
Posted by
KC9JQT on 2006-12-20
Eliminating CW in exams is not the same as eliminating CW altogether
One of the most common objections to doing away with
CW in getting a ticket in the UK was that CW was still
used, and useful, so it's no surprise to hear the same sort
of comments raised about it here.
But the proposal to do away with CW as a qualifier for
access to HF doesn't mean, or imply, that CW will cease to
exist as a means of communication for those who want to
use it, and there is no reason, nor any legitimate excuse,
to tie the two things together. After all, I don't have to
pass an exam in any other specific emission type in order
to use it, and CW as a qualifier for access to HF is an
outdated and insufficient means to test for competence in
HF propagation. There's no doubt that being able to read
CW is useful for beacon idents, but come on, that's hardly
a good enough reason to require competence in reading
and sending it.
What is needed is a licensing structure that not only
ensures that operators are competent in the use of
equipment and transmitting on their selected bands
without interference, but that also encourages, certainly
not hinders, new entrants to the hobby. Demonstrating
competence in CW meets neither need, and I believe does
hinder growth of the hobby because it remains an
anachronistic requirement in many peoples' minds, and a
serious practical hinderance to many who are otherwise
perfectly capable.
I favor development of an exam structure that adds HF-
specific operating and propagation issues to to the
question pools for those who want to obtain the right to
work below 50MHz. Such an exam would foster better
understanding of HF operating and still provide the
gateway necessary to protect the progressive structure of
amateur licensing - should that be a truly desirable thing
in the first place.
There are two arguments for maintaining CW qualification
that simply aren't justified however: the "I had to do it so I
don't see why other people shouldn't as well", because
that flies in the face of the need to constantly review and
modernize when necessary, and "CW is still useful",
because no-one is suggesting doing away with it as a
means of communication.
Those who feel that doing away with the CW test weakens
the license and makes it less worthwhile - makes the
bands little more than expensive CB - need only
remember that no-one is suggesting doing away with the
exam itself. Indeed, it may prove a perfect opportunity to
strengthen the basic exams so that getting a ticket isn't
just a matter of memorizing a small pool of questions and
answers.
Come on guys, it's time to think constructively not
protectively.
Posted by
KG4VTQ on 2006-06-14
Eliminating CW in exams is not the same as eliminating CW altogether
One of the most common objections to doing away with
CW in getting a ticket in the UK was that CW was still
used, and useful, so it's no surprise to hear the same sort
of comments raised about it here.
But the proposal to do away with CW as a qualifier for
access to HF doesn't mean, or imply, that CW will cease to
exist as a means of communication for those who want to
use it, and there is no reason, nor any legitimate excuse,
to tie the two things together. After all, I don't have to
pass an exam in any other specific emission type in order
to use it, and CW as a qualifier for access to HF is an
outdated and insufficient means to test for competence in
HF propagation. There's no doubt that being able to read
CW is useful for beacon idents, but come on, that's hardly
a good enough reason to require competence in reading
and sending it.
What is needed is a licensing structure that not only
ensures that operators are competent in the use of
equipment and transmitting on their selected bands
without interference, but that also encourages, certainly
not hinders, new entrants to the hobby. Demonstrating
competence in CW meets neither need, and I believe does
hinder growth of the hobby because it remains an
anachronistic requirement in many peoples' minds, and a
serious practical hinderance to many who are otherwise
perfectly capable.
I would much rather favor development of an exam
structure that adds HF-specific operating and propagation
issues to to the question pools for those who want to
obtain the right to work below 50MHz. Such an exam
would foster better understanding of HF operating
procedures and still provide the gateway necessary to
protect the progressive structure of amateur licensing -
should that be a truly desirable thing in the first place.
There are two arguments for maintaining CW qualification
that simply aren't justified however: the "I had to do it so I
don't see why other people shouldn't as well", because
that flies in the face of the need to sensibly review and
modernize the hobby when necessary, and "CW is still
useful", because no-one is suggesting doing away with it
as a means of communication - just testing on it.
Those who feel that doing away with the CW test weakens
the license and makes it less worthwhile - makes the
bands little more than expensive CB - need only
remember that no-one is suggesting doing away with the
exam itself. Indeed, it may prove a perfect opportunity to
strengthen the basic exams so that getting a ticket isn't
just a matter of memorizing a small pool of questions and
answers.
Come on guys, it's time to think constructively not
protectively.
Posted by
KG4VTQ on 2006-06-14
Time for me to toss a log on the fire. Let the code go the way of the all tube radio. I know I have just faned the flamers but come on the spark gap transmitter died out slow but it was replaced AM radio on the ham bands.AM to is almost gone there are a few who still do it SSB is going strong. More and more are on there Mic rather than the Key. CW is like the Ponyexpress Its time has come and gone. I am working on upgrading and yes I will use CW untill it is droped by the FCC. I know under some condictions CW is the only way to pass traffic and somewhere down the road a better form of communications will become the standard. Thats my 2 cents worth be it right or wrong. I only hope radio builders 10 years from now still have a CW position on the knob.
Posted by
KC8YXA on 2006-04-02
Code elimination or not
Time for me to toss a log on the fire. Let the code go the way of the all tube radio. I know I have just faned the flamers but come on the spark gap transmitter died out slow but it was replaced AM radio on the ham bands.AM to is almost gone there are a few who still do it SSB is going strong. More and more are on there Mic rather than the Key. CW is like the Ponyexpress Its time has come and gone. I am working on upgrading and yes I will use CW untill it is droped by the FCC. I know under some condictions CW is the only way to pass traffic and somewhere down the road a better form of communications will become the standard. Thats my 2 cents worth be it right or wrong. I only hope radio builders 10 years from now still have a CW position on the knob.
Posted by
KC8YXA on 2006-04-02
Code Requirement
KEEP THE CODE!!! I started to learn the code wen I was 14 yrs. old, gave up and never became a ham like I wanted to when I was young, 50 now and I learned the code and yes it was HARD!!! But I did it and I am proud that I did, whether you are CW Ham or SSB Ham, KEEP THE CODE!! 73 Carl K4CDS
Posted by
KI4GAQ on 2005-11-30
The Code...CW
I'd like to keep CW and see it required at about 5wpm for any class. Of course, I'd also like to keep the old five classes...Novice, Tech, General, Adv and Extra. The CW serves as a screen if nothing else. Perhaps as things currently are, we should keep it as a 5wpm requirement for Extra?
Posted by
KA0SOH on 2005-11-28
CW bands getting crowded
More and more traffic is now showing up on the CW bands. If this trend continues, we may have to absorb part of the phone bands back into the CW and Digital bands.
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-11-26
Get rid of this 19th century dinosaur.
I think the morse code should have been eliminated as a requirement 20 years ago. In an age of satellites, digital and other improvements in technology it no longer makes any sense except for hobbyists. It's like requiring skill in horsemanship for modern authmobile owners because "a horse can get through when automobiles won't." Time to end this farce.
Posted by
KB0RDL on 2005-11-22
CW for me
As long as there is place in our allocated bands for those us who enjoy CW to converse with those sharing the same interest I could careless about the pros/cons. Its the phone boys who seem to suffer the most from no coders. It seems to me the FCC is pressured from the rest of the world on this no code and it is bound to happen, just give me frequencies for cw or give me another hobby.
Posted by
K6DXC on 2005-11-17
FCC keeps deregulating
Does not suprise me.
I can almost see the FCC producing a NOVICE LITE grade ticket.
I can see the FCC giving GMRS, FRS, and CB users a test free upgrade to a codeless, clueless exam.
Posted by
WA2JJH on 2005-11-08
GOO BYE CODE BS
CODE IS A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME TO MEI HAVE A FULL LIFE CODE WAS OLD NEWS WHEN GABBY HAYS RUSHED TO THE TELEGRAF OFFICE TO SEND A MESSAGE TO THE LONE RANGER ABOUT A POSSABLE TRAIN CRASH IN A TUNNEL SOME WHERE IN BFE MAYBE MAKE IT MANDATORY FOR ALL NEW FOLKS TO ATTEND 3 CLASSES BEFORE BEING ALLOWED TO TAKE THE TECH EXAMWHAT WAS THE TECH EXAM REALLY FOR NOT ONE QUESTION ABOUT THE FREQ RANGE YOU ARE ALLOWED TO PLAY ON
Posted by
CONSERVOZILLA on 2005-11-02
AL FORMS OF TESTING SHOULD BE DROPPED
THIS GOOD OLE BOY MENTALITY I HAD TO DO IT SO SHOULD NEEDS TO BE DUMPEDGABBY HAYES HAD TO LEARN CODE FOR EFFECT IN OLD TIME MOVIES TIME IS MONEY AND SPEECH IS SUPPOSED TO BE FREE IN AMERICAS WASTEING TIME STUDYING FOR THE TESTS IS NOT FREE SPEECH I HAD FUN ON THE CB RADIO FREE YEARS AGO DURING THE FAD NOW THEY ARE ALL ON 2 METER IN THE MOST PART INOW HEAR ALL THIS GRIPEING ABOUT FRTEE BANDERS WHEN MOST OF THEM HAVE BETTER MANNERSTHAN EXTRA CLASS HAMS I LEARNED A LOT FROM THEM JUST MONITOR ING THEM IN THE OLD DAYS AND TO THOSE THAT GRIPE ABOUT TYPEING ABOUT TYPEING IN ALL CAPS THEY ARE JUST CRY BABIES IT WAS FOR WHEN MOST COMPUTERS ONLY HAD 12K OF RAM ANYWAY NOW WITH GIGS OF RAM IT DOESN'T MATTER AS FOR IT HURTING THEIR EYES AT MOST IT MIGHT INCREASE THE LUMINS BY 1 CANDLE POWER THEY BETTER NOT EVER TURN A LIGHT ON OR GO OUTSIDE IN THE SUN IT MIGHT KILL THEM
Posted by
CONSERVOZILLA on 2005-11-02
Code Elimination
Well here we go again on the code issue elimination again. I am against dropping the code requirement period. Some time ago I participated in a forum on e ham about teck plus and novice class operators not being able to find slow code on the novice bands.
I started operating slow code on the novice portion of hf bands. I was somewhat surprised that 80% of my contacts were extra class operators. That has got to tell me something. In retrospect I am now looking out of the box on this issue as I am finding more new operators working cw. Fists club roster is growing, belive over 12,000 members now. I guess I am trying to say if the fcc drops it, more hamns will use it. Also from what I hear the Navy dropped it and now has it aboard for back up communications. No matter what happens on this issue this op will pound brass until I croak. 73.s
Posted by
KB3IFK on 2005-10-29
Code endures
Doing away with the code requirement is not the same as doing away with Morse Code. An ingenius idea does not need the protection of law to survive. Now if the plan was to bann Morse Code on the ham bands, then you would have a reason to gripe. Don't be a control freak. If you love it, set it free and just keep on using it. Try talking about it nicely to others, then maybe they will keep using it, too!
Posted by
AI2IA on 2005-10-22
Bigger Picture
It's not just the code that's going away, it's ham radio that's going away...
Posted by
K7FD on 2005-10-05
Those in favor or dropping the requirements
One poster said those that did not pass the code test are those who are in favor of dropping the code test - "did you notice" was his comment.
Well I passed at 13wpm and I AM IN FAVOR of dropping the code test. Many of my fellow hams who also passed the "higher speed" code test are also in favor of dropping the code test. We might be older, we passed the original tests, but we see the code test as keeping ham radio "old" and making it unattractive to new entrants. Out with the old, in with the new. It's time to change. I still use CW, it can be fun, but it's my decision to use it. It should be yours too. There should not be any testing on any one particular mode. CW is just another mode.
What I would like to see is a typing test so people can learn how to post on the Internet without typing in all caps. As in you cannot get on the Internet, make postings, or send email until you can properly learn to post properly using lower and upper case letters. ;-)
Posted by
WB8NUT on 2005-10-02
morse code requirement
Please someone provide references to when the last time code was used in an emergency.
Maybe a list of who has code capabilities in there emergency vehicles.
Is there anyone at fema or the red cross or the military or police or fire depts to talk to with the code?
everyone says that it is used in emergency's yet I have never heard of anyone using it in an emergency.
sorry just had to vent my apologies that I am under the age of 60
KF4MHG
Posted by
KF4MHG on 2005-09-30
morse code requirement
Please someone provide references to when the last time code was used in an emergency.
Maybe a list of who has code capabilities in there emergency vehicles.
Is there anyone at fema or the red cross or the military or police or fire depts to talk to with the code?
everyone says that it is used in emergency's yet I have never heard of anyone using it in an emergency.
sorry just had to vent my apologies that I am under the age of 60
KF4MHG
Posted by
KF4MHG on 2005-09-30
Code
I hate code. Never use it.
That being said, it IS an art form. It DOES work when voice won't. It works when the computer fails. It doesn't suck up bandwidth.
It needs to be retained
Posted by
N4PEQ on 2005-09-22
K6JPA
As a Technician Class holder, I feel it is a shame that the demise of what all upper class holders have enjoyed will be ruined by upcoming changes.
In my opinion, It's not the code that is the true problem here. It's the wall that will be created once those of "us" begin to move upwards in classification and are resented by "you" because of changes that are not all of our faults. I feel the divide will be nothing short of a civil war, between those that "had to" versus those of us that didn't. This will hurt both sides of the spectrum, as the resentment will cost some of us the very thing that you have to offer us...experience.
I, for one, am practicing my code, whether or not it will be required. I will be proud when I become proficient with what I am learning. Its unfortunate that I'll always be looked upon by "you" as someone "who got something for nothing".
Posted by
K6JPA on 2005-09-20
CW and QRP
Part 97.1 not only talks about communication but also advancing the radio art, including technical skills.
I love construction and experimentation. Of course, it is possible to build high power voice and data equipment but the design and construction requirements are too much for me. My building skills are limited so I stick to less sophisticated low power CW equipment, power supplies (batteries), transmission lines, antennas, and portable emergency opeations.
The good news is that QRP is fun and challenging and, as a result, my CW skills have improved.
There is no doubt that HAMs will continue to advance communicating skills. I'm just concerned that with the demise of CW we will see a decline in low power equipment and a related decline in homebuilding and experimentation. Some of the radio art will be lost.
Posted by
WA5EWN on 2005-09-16
Code
I believe that if the code isn't dropped, the only ones left on the HF bands in the next couple of decades are going to be foreignors. Our numbers are dwindling and we need an infusion of new hams - It's the only way to keep Americans on the HF bands in the long term scheme of things. 73's
Posted by
KC8EMH on 2005-09-16
Keep it, I guess...
I don't really have a strong opinion on this, but I think for now we should keep it, for two reasons. First, in emergency situations, it's almost essential. It is more efficient and uses less power than other modes. Second, as many have pointed out, the written exams have become easier as our radios have become easier to use. Requiring someone to learn some useful skill to upgrade their license makes it worth more.
73's de KB1EVZ/AG (just upgraded last night!)
Posted by
KB1EVZ on 2005-09-13
Keep Morse Code
It will be a shame to lose the CW requirement, for all these years Morse Code is a piece of the HAM Radio history that will unfortunately die.
New HAMS should have some contact of Morse Code to get an appreciation of where this hobby came from and where it is going.
5 WPM is extremely easy and anyone that has the will and capabilty should be able to pass and when they do pass they can feel a sense of accomplishment but in this day and age everybody wants something for nothing.
I am sorry to say but the airwaves are going to be more chaotic and become terribly out of hand. I know because I RX more than TX and right now it really bad and those are the ones with 5 & 13 WPM. Granted they are only a few and most are good operators.
Goodbye HAM freqs and Hello CB operators on HAM freqs..
Posted by
NA4RA on 2005-09-11
Code Testng elimination
My position is basically in agreement with the immediately previous post by WV2N - and that is to let them drop the code requirement for access to the voice segments of the bands but there should be a code endorsement required for CW sub-band access.
My greatest fear is that they will basically just open up the entire bandwidths to voice, tty, data, video, fax, and whatever else is out there and eventually CW will become extinct. You have to keep in mind 'How to boil a frog' when watching what is going on now. Bit by bit and pretty soon Ham licenses will be purchased at the K-Mart in the Sporting Goods store and renewed online.
You call sign will be your pet's name.
Posted by
KK4DW on 2005-09-08
Where's Waldo???
...at this point it's all moot. The major requirement to be part of President Waldo's cabinet is to turn a deaf ear.
Posted by
W2SNJ on 2005-09-04
International Morse Code
Yakking is to Morse code as jacking off is to sex.
Posted by
K5RIX on 2005-09-02
My Vote is No
.
CW must remain and to keep the rogues off of the ham bands.
You can see what happened to the 11 meter band, it will happen to the Amateur bands.
CW separates the men from the boys.
.:
Posted by
W6TH on 2005-09-02
"Amateur" - One Who Loves
A radio amateur loves the hobby. To demonstrate one's "extra" love of the hobby, one should be able to demonstrate it beyond the minimum by showing SOME CW proficiency. Extra Class License - extra proficiency! Now there's a concept!
Long live CW!
- Mike
Posted by
K6TBR on 2005-09-01
code/nocode
Ref KC4UEB hello Richard. There is honestly a split in the amateur ranks Richard. The best way to sum up the reason for this attitude is what happened here to the local hams in East Ky and Southern Wva. We have some of the worse case people who are honestly the dregs of the cb band coming into the hobby since the code requirement was dropped to 5wpm. We can't elmer them they "think" they know more about radio than a ham thats been on the air over 50 years. I've had to bring in the fcc to take back my repeaters. They were making them sound worse than any cb channel you ever listened to. They played music used their cb handles and would not give their call signs at all. They talk to others with this same attitude for ham radio about five miles away and use over the legal limit to do it just because they enjoy "watching the meter swing" as they say, when they are on hf. Many of us have tried to help these types and honestly got cussed and threatened. This is what we're all afraid of. In many parts of the country there are hams that have the same story as i to tell. Cw has not been much of a filter to keep out the riff raff. I keep seeing folks refer to the mess on 75 and 80 meters and i agree there have always been weirdos on the bands but not like in recent years since the code was dropped to 5wpm. How's it going to be when there is no longer a code requirement at all? From my point of view and the terrible experiance i've gone through its going to be pure hell. I'm not going to preach the sky is falling but i've seen some of the worse case dumbasses in the world go from cb to extra already in six months time. The bad thing about that is they're still just cbers although they hold extra class tickets. The way a person conducts themselves on the air is where i form my opinion of them. I don't care if you passed 20wpm like i did or waivered the code to become extra. Its what you see and hear on the bands that's the deciding point. There will certainly be a division in our ranks for years to come after all this smoke clears. All this stuff being said like i'm an extra lite or a no code tech needs to be stopped too. These comments will only keep the snob ball rolling. As for those of you that want to turn amateur radio into your next cb band, you will not be welcomed into our ranks, simple as that. If you have an honest intent of becoming an amateur radio operator you will be welcomed. Leave the cb crap on chickenband and don't try to rub the older hams nose in it. My 2 cents: 73 John WR8D
Posted by
WR8D on 2005-08-29
Thumbed Noses?
The only one's who have thumbed their noses to anyone URBANMONKEY have been those types of CW operators who claim to be better than everyone else because they know and love CW. People like YOU are the one's thumbing anything.
Now the tide is about to turn and people like YOU are feeling what those you've thumbed all these years felt, which is PUT OUT TO PASTURE!!
Good riddens to people like URBANMONKEY (who, by the way, is too afraid to use his callsign either bacause of cowardness or that he's not even a licensed amateur operator!).
So how does it feel URBANMONKEY? Now people like YOU are the one's who are being cast aside, and soon there won't be anything you can do about it except rant and whine in forums like this.
Poor Baby.
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-26
no code
As an extra and a VE I welcome the code-free proposal. when I received my extra in 1989, I heard all about how hard the 20 wpm test was at the FCC office and that I had it easy. the code didn't make me a better voice operator and I would have had to learn the code to use the CW subbands anyway. the code requirement simply slowed my progression into and in the hobby.
Posted by
WS2U on 2005-08-24
yehaww.....................
KC9GUZ, its not going to be new hams like yourself that will catch it from the oldtimers on HF. It will be those who have been Techs for years that have outright refused to learn code, demanded free upgrades and thumbed their noses up at the rest of us who worked for our privileges. Go ahead and upgrade. Learn code and take the test. Join the rest of us who worked for our privileges.
73
UG
Posted by
URBANGORILLA on 2005-08-24
Code test for license
I passed the Extra license exam over 20 years ago when one had to pass a 20 wpm CW test. I like to use CW now, but do not think it needs to be license requirement any more that an exam on, say, RTTY or PSK31 or any of the other modes hams can use. I further see no degredation of amateur radio if this goes into effect. It will not doom CW until all those who use it no longer use it. CW can be fun, and those who decide to use it will, regardless of any license requirement. This is a hobby, and you make of it what you want. We need new folks to participate, and passing a code test does not, in itself, make one a better or more capable radio operator.
Posted by
NB9D on 2005-08-24
Keep it for Extra....!!
I operate 98% CW & enjoy it. I think the code should be kept at least for Extra Class. Unfortunately, our entire society is being dumbed down --- not just ham radio --- for the benefit of the lazy, "Gimme...", "I want it now and I don't want to lift a finger for it...", "...DUH!!!!..." types. We can sure do without these types.
If all you will operate is phone or digital, there should be no real problem not doing a code test. But if you are gonna be in the CW sub-bands, you should know the code and demonstrate some proficiency. 5 WPM is not hard to do!!! Unless you're too lazy to learn it...
Posted by Daniel R. Dorsey Jr on 2005-08-24Keep it for Extra....!!
I operate 98% CW & enjoy it. I think the code should be kept at least for Extra Class. Unfortunately, our entire society is being dumbed down --- not just ham radio --- for the benefit of the lazy, "Gimme...", "I want it now and I don't want to lift a finger for it...", "...DUH!!!!..." types. We can sure do without these types.
If all you will operate is phone or digital, there should be no real problem not doing a code test. But if you are gonna be in the CW sub-bands, you should know the code and demonstrate some proficiency. 5 WPM is not hard to do!!! Unless you're too lazy to learn it...
Posted by Daniel R. Dorsey Jr on 2005-08-24CB and Ham
It's interesting to see results here mirror earlier polls with 55% favoring retaining a CW test in some form.
The silly arguments about operating style are meaningless. CW tests don't control operating style. CW is simply an operating skill. CW allows many stations to fit in a small frequency space, it is one of the (if not the) most power consumption efficient modes for distance, it is the minimal equipment for maximum distance mode, and so on.
Like the majority, I think there should be an access license for people with a casual communications interests. Unfortunately when a choice is offered to the general public about getting something for free vs. doing a little work (and a CW multiple guess test at 5 WPM is VERY little work), the people who make a lot of noise are the ones who want something for free.
So why don't the 55% who nfavor some form of FCC test for CW file comments with the FCC? Probably, like me, they have given up on the government doing the right thing and simply expect amateur radio will eventually reflect our instant gratification society now where making a little extra effort is considered unnecessary.
73 Tom
Posted by
W8JI on 2005-08-23
Code Elimination
Where did this idea of swelling our numbers to retain our bands get started? Most everyone who wanted a license is already licensed. And just where did one expect to further reduce the code testing requirement to in order to further relax it? It was already relaxed to the point it was no real test of anything. Why don't we just eliminate all testing, after all it just discriminates against someone. Then we can go on and hit rock bottom, figure the problem out and reinstitute testing as appropriate. And if anyone doesn't believe that testing was a lid filter, just wait. You should have seen what it would have been like without testing. Personally I don't care anymore. The sooner we have our no testing flirtation, the sooner we'll get beyond it. Our licenses are seen as near meaningless now in the marketplace.
Posted by
WA4DOU on 2005-08-23
"So why don't the 55% who nfavor some form of FCC test for CW file comments with the FCC?"
Tom - I've wondered the same thing. I believe that the FCC would be hard put to completely drop cw testing if 55% of the comments were for the retention of some testing. But at the current against/for comment ratio, the FCC's job will be easy.
Phil - AD5X
Posted by
AD5X on 2005-08-23
Code Elimation
O.k. It seems I have to put in my 2 cents now. When I made No code tech, I waited for this day to come, and waited and waited. I was complaining to my friend that was an Extra, about how hard it was to me to learn c.w. Well he just shot back "you are to lazy, your not trying hard enough" Well guess what he was right!! One day I sat down and told myself, I will get this if it kills me. Well it did not kill me, in fact I like c.w. I passed my cw test with 100% copy the first time!
It seems to me that in todays world everybody want things given to them, and not earned. I was reading some of the comments on "Code Elimation" and some of the replys (not all just some, so don't start yelling) are from techs. And there some replys are 11 meterish.
Now how are this people going to sound like on 20 meters when they get upgraded. And yes I know we have our share of problem makers now, so if you come on e-ham here and talk like c.b.ers what will everybody think of you? I know that there is alot of good Techs out there, that will help out the hobby. But along with the good comes the bad. One last thing. The S.O.S. did not give you a drivers license just because you wanted one!
Posted by
N8TNJ on 2005-08-23
If you are not going to reflect ACCURATE and timely RESULTS, WHY Have it AT ALL? It IS NOW 20 Days since the poll has been updated.
Posted by
HAWKDOME on 2005-08-23
I know --
Lets all pretend that anything you say actually carries any weight with anyone --
beat the dead horse
Beat him dead
keep beating --
..
..
Still beating!!
Posted by
ARRLFAN on 2005-08-23
I know --
Lets all pretend that anything you say actually carries any weight with anyone --
beat the dead horse
Beat him dead
keep beating --
..
..
Still beating!!
Posted by
ARRLFAN on 2005-08-23
Code elimination
Personally, I think of code profiency as another survival skill. Some of us had BETTER know it. I don't use it much, but I'll bet, if need be, I can recall enough to send, "SOS", or "People trapped", or "We're OK" or whatever on a car horn or a flashlight. Yeah it's far out. So was 9/11.
Posted by
KA9PBO on 2005-08-23
yehaww.....................
Gee, with all these negative attitudes about the dropping of the code kinda makes a person who is upgrading to General (I just took my written and passed it and am studying the code to take the 5 WPM test) wonder if its all worth the bother to even try. I hope when and if i do pass the second part of the test and get my General i dont run into a bunch of angry hams on HF that will take out their frustrations on a newly upgraded General that is me!!!
Dont get me wrong guys, (or gals if any of you are) but all this negativeness is giving propestive hams or ones that want to upgrade really look at the whole scheme of things and wonder "Gee,do I want to really do this?" Granted, I love this hobby but all this -----(negative) is and will come hurt the hobby!!! :^( Remember, it is the FCC thats deciding to do this NOT the hams themselves. Not all of us no code Techs have the "I want it now and dont want to work for it" attitudes or are too lazy to do the code. Ive always believed in the ethic of working and earning for what you want. Heck, everything ive gotten in life ive had to bust my rump for.
73,s
Posted by
KC9GUZ on 2005-08-23
The FCC Food Chain
Let's face it. Amateur Radio is at the bottom of the FCC's Food Chain. The FCC does not make any money from the administering or processing of amateur radio examinations and licenses. The money collected for amateur radio examinations goes to the VEC to cover the expenses for supplies, testing materials, postage, 605 forms, Certificates of Successful Completion of Examination or CSCE forms and miscellaneous. The remainder goes to the VE's to cover their traveling expenses to and from the testing location.
The only money made by the FCC relative to Amateur Radio is the processing fee for Vanity Call Signs. The current processing fee for a Vanity Call Sign is $20.80. Realistically, the FCC makes money when it processes and issues a GMRS license at $80.00 a pop.
Therefore, every license renewal, new license and license upgrade the FCC processes is an expense to the FCC in manpower, paper work and filing. Overall, Amateur Radio is a financial burden on the FCC. This is why Amateur Radio is at the bottom of the FCC's Food Chain.
Now that is has been established that we are at the bottom of the food chain, we can better understand why the FCC seems to drag its feet when it comes to making changes for the betterment of Amateur Radio in the future. The FCC has already made its decision on the current NPRM. It's just going through the steps to make us feel like we actually have a say in the matter of the CW testing requirement.
As a member of the ARRL, I often wonder what this Amateur Radio lobbying group does for us. Does the ARRL represent the wishes of its membership or the wishes of its Board of Directors? This is a Can of Worms all by itself for another discussion.
KF4TQV
Posted by
KF4TQV on 2005-08-22
ARRL Representation
"Does the ARRL represent the wishes of its membership or the wishes of its Board of Directors?"
I communicate with my Section and Division representatives on all issues of interest to me, and I receive feedback from them. Should I ever feel they are not being responsive to me, I can vote another when their term is up.
Phil - AD5X
Posted by
AD5X on 2005-08-22
re: Talk about tooten your horn
N3JBH posted the following:
"I am glad to see your so hummble thank you
jeff n3jbh"
Posted by N3JBH on August 20, 2005
From WA1TAQ:
Jeff,
All I can say to you is there is only one "m" in humble. Did you get your ticket via the VE program?
TAQ
Posted by
WA1TAQ on 2005-08-22
THe FCC Isn't in Business...
KF4TQV:
Hi, Frank. As you know, the FCC is a FEDERAL GOVERNMENT organization. They are not an entity that makes money. We, the citizens of the United States pay for their existence.
They, the employees of the FCC, are here to ensure that the American people have available - at reasonable costs and without discrimination - rapid, efficient, nation - and world-wide communication services; whether by radio, television, wire, satellite, or cable.
Moreover, the FCC is responsible to Congress and the American people for ensuring that an orderly framework exists within which communications products and services can be quickly and reasonably provided to consumers and businesses. Equally important, the Commission must also address the communications aspects of public health and safety, ensure the universal availability of basic telecommunications services, and make services accessible to all people - whether they live in a rural area, have a disability, and/or protect consumers about their rights.
These statements are almost verbatim from the FCC's Strategic Plan.
They don't ever make anything resembling a profit from fees, etc. That would be wrong!
73.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-22
sorry Joey WA1TAQ
From WA1TAQ:
Jeff,
All I can say to you is there is only one "m" in humble. Did you get your ticket via the VE program?
No Joey I got mine via the Wal-Mart clearance isle. The didn�t have the filthy rich sort of license there at the time. But glad to see your 3 stations are coming along fine.
Like your quotes also.
"Solid state is just a fad, tubes are coming back."
"Solid state is for hams that haven't got the stones to take a good B+ jolt."
"Solid state is for hams that don't know what B+ is."
"I'm a phone man." (credit to Sam & Dave for the 'I'm a soul man' tune). "If you need DSP and the mother of all illegal amplifiers to work a contest or dx pileup then clean out your ears and go back to CB where you belong."
You know Joey I learned something as a Master millwright. We where put on the earth to make what an engineer couldn't design.
Posted by
N3JBH on 2005-08-22
The FCC Isn't in Business... Reply
NL7W,
I agree with all you said about the FCC and the services it provides, but at no time did I ever imply that the FCC makes a profit. As tax payers, we expect a government agency to provide those services for its citizens.
What I am saying is that the powerful mega communications companies that pay large fees to the FCC are more likely to receive some spsecial considerations when it comes to potential regulation changes in a much more timely manner. I am not saying that there is corruption in the FCC, but from a businees standpoint, many companies will make some ethical concessions for that company that is returning to make another million dollar plus purchase.
I'm just pointing out that amateur radio is not on the top of the FCC Food Chain as all those mega communication companies when it comes down to potential regulation changes in a timely manner.
KF4TQV
Posted by
KF4TQV on 2005-08-22
CW is HISTORY Soon!
Funny how I keep seeing comments being made how HF will turn into CB if they crop CW testing requirements!
Apparently these same people either don't listen to various bands on HF, or they haven't bothered to read where myself and others already stated we hear some of the worst language ever uttered from a human mouth right there on the big-time HF band!
And how is HF gonna turn into CB again?
The fact is CW will be eliminated for testing requirements soon. All the chest puffing from the CW enthusiasts that obviously don't have a grasp on what really goes on in the HF band will have to continue to make up worthless slogans and saying about how CW being so great.
Apparently it ain't so great because every country on the planet has dropped it. The United States is next, and it WILL happen very soon.
But I just love hearing all the infantile sayings people have for CW and how they try belittling other human beings who don't share their love for this mode!
As far as HF becoming like CB, it's been that way for many years now. But I guess what these people are really saying is that it's okay to talk filthy and hate black people on the HF band so long as you learn CW prior to doing it. The it's okay . . . .
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-22
CW is HISTORY Soon!
Funny how I keep seeing comments being made how HF will turn into CB if they crop CW testing requirements!
Apparently these same people either don't listen to various bands on HF, or they haven't bothered to read where myself and others already stated we hear some of the worst language ever uttered from a human mouth right there on the big-time HF band!
And how is HF gonna turn into CB again?
The fact is CW will be eliminated for testing requirements soon. All the chest puffing from the CW enthusiasts that obviously don't have a grasp on what really goes on in the HF band will have to continue to make up worthless slogans and saying about how CW being so great.
Apparently it ain't so great because every country on the planet has dropped it. The United States is next, and it WILL happen very soon.
But I just love hearing all the infantile sayings people have for CW and how they try belittling other human beings who don't share their love for this mode!
As far as HF becoming like CB, it's been that way for many years now. But I guess what these people are really saying is that it's okay to talk filthy and hate black people on the HF band so long as you learn CW prior to doing it. The it's okay . . . .
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-22
Questionable HF Operating
I too have heard a lot of poor operating going on in the HF bands. I recall one such conversation by an Extra where he proceeded to completely trash another ham and use language so bad I had to turn the VFO. My wife happened to walk by and heard this before I could turn the VFO and asked me what I was listening to. Reluctantly to told her it was ham radio and she just looked at me totally shocked because she knows ham radio is suppsoed to be a cordial place with rules. I found several frequencies where this was going on and it wasn't just foul language. I heard a lot of general degrading of others on there and it was quite sad to hear this going on. I can relate to the statement someone made where you had to be very careful who you let listen to the HF band because you never know when you are going to tune in to a ham cursing someone out or talking about inappropriate things.
It is very sad to see this going on anywhere on the radio but especially on HF.
Posted by
YEPSURE on 2005-08-22
Code
CW has its place in ham radio. While a novice in 1977, CW was fun, and still is as a General.
I am in favor of maybe relaxing the requirements for CW, but not in totally doing away with it.
I do favor dropping CW for general Class licensing (we need to increase our numbers to keep our bands) but i fee we need to keep CW as a requirement for the Extra Class license.
Posted by
KA4EIR on 2005-08-22
code/nocode
Ref WB2GOF: Its already been decided and will not make a differance to get on the fcc website. Big money has gone into this and thats all its about. We have no honest representation for us. Look back at the last ten years and see how its been going. Its just a membership drive "period". We're slowly being sold out and dumbed down by big interest simply for the buck. "period". WR8D
Posted by
WR8D on 2005-08-21
For pete sake, stop your whining!
I'm tired of hearing about the 'dumbing down' of ham radio that quite a few are complaining about.
Todays ham radio gear is a lot simpler in some ways than the gear of years past. Yesterdays ham had to know how to make adjustments to his gear or they would burn it out--or up--in a hurry. There wasn't any choice in the matter, you HAD to learn the proper procedures BEFORE you touched the gear. Todays gear is much more forgiving--and more durable in some ways. It is no longer necessary to learn the procedure to follow to tune up a rig, unless it is one of the rigs of years past.
Todays license has followed that line of thought--it is easier to get the license because of the simplicity of todays gear, and the relative ease of use of that gear. The reasoning is the licensee will learn as they put more time into the hobby. For instance, a ham who wants to use older equipment will learn the proper procedures to follow BECAUSE they want to use and preserve the old gear and not destroy it.
If you want to cry about something, cry about the real threats to the radio waves--the BPL initiative and the government decision to use the bands as a cash cow and give away their control of it.
Posted by
K1CJS on 2005-08-21
For pete sake, stop your whining!
And yes. I include the code question in my opinion--removing code testing is NOT dumbing down ham radio.
Posted by
K1CJS on 2005-08-21
<Actually, I'd like to hear any of the folks who claim to be political conservatives but support more testing explain how they reconcile that with their "less government" attitudes.>
Since the government is not doing the testing, the "more or less government" question does not apply.
Posted by
K4JF on 2005-08-21
Its not a complaint, it is a fact !!!
Quote from K1CJS:
<I'm tired of hearing about the 'dumbing down' of ham radio that quite a few are complaining about.>
Dumbing Down is not a complaint, it is a statement of absolute fact. It appears as if the FCC is gradually destroying the Amateur Radio Service bit by bit. Anyone that does not recognize this is a Newcomer to the hobby. If this trend continues, Amateur Radio will be gone in very few years. The elimination of CW testing is just another step going down. The current testing program only requires memorizing a few answers which are furnished word by word. The next step is no testing at all. The dumbdown will then be complete. If you dont want to hear the complaints, I would suggest either find another hobby, or help reverse the current trend.
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-21
CODE AND FCC
I GUESS IT HAS ALWAYS COME DOWN TO THIS DAY. MAYBE IT WONT TURN IN TO CB RADIO WHO KNOWS? MY THOUGHTS ARE HOW MUCH MONEY HAVE THE 3 MAJOR COMPANIES PAYED THUR LOBBIES TO GET THIS PASSED, JUST THINK MAYBE I AM WRONG, IT SURE WOULD HELP SELLS OF HF EQUIPMENT. ITS A DONE DEAL, AMATURE RADIO MIGHT NEVER BE THE SAME AS THE OLD TIMERS KNOW IT TO MUCH HIGH TECH FOR A CW AND SSB OPERATOR.
Posted by
WA5U on 2005-08-21
No Code
Looks like it's a done deal to me. The FCC just put this out for our comment but you can bet it's almost cast in stone.
I'm a code lover from way back and spend most of my time in the CW sub-bands. I don't do phone much anymore. No challenge. As long as FCC keeps the sub-bands for CW, then I'm for the no-code license for HF.
I just don't want a bunch of band hogging SSBer's down where the real DX is (same for rtty/pactor/packet/etc). The guys that want to come down where we are will learn the code. The guys that don't want to learn it, won't.
As for the CBer's coming into the hobby, well, go up on any phone sub-band and just listen. They're already there (especially on 40 and 80).
I've been listening to the doomer and gloomers since I first got my ticket in 78. They've been forecasting the demise of ham radio as long as I've been a ham. It's not happened yet. This won't do it either. So suck it up and let's move on.
73,
de WQ5O
Tom
Posted by
WQ5O on 2005-08-21
dumbing down
Ref K1CJS: wasn't aware i was "crying". I was stating a fact that anyone who has been active on the bands these last few years has become aware of. Some of us "painfully". I'll admit though it does seem to depend on what part of the country you live in as to what part of this mess you've experianced. Here where i live for a few months it was pure hell just trying to maintain control of my two meter machines. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him take a drink. Same thing applies to a dumbass freebander cbing fruitcake. He'll always just be a bootlegger and make his own rules up with no respect for anyone even after we make it so easy for him to enter our hobby. The reason i say this is i have five perfect examples of what i have said above living within thirty miles of me. They are nothing more than die hard cbing freebanders now with extra class ham licenses. I can just imagine how it will be with those that were to stupid to even learn the simple five wpm decides to bring their freebander attitudes to the hambands. Thanks to the dumbdown and the coming give away hf license. 73 WR8D
Posted by
WR8D on 2005-08-21
No Code
With all the hobby communication availabe out there over the Internet, cell phones, and others. I think it is a great idea to eliminate the code requirement for the test. After all CW is just another form of communication. If the forms of communication should be part of the test, then add physically setting up a Packet station, or a SSTV station as part of the test.
Nobody gets involved with these forms of communication unless they are intersted in it. I think CW should be thought if in the same way.
Sure, we all had to take the Code test and so many think everyone has to pay their dues and take the code test. But I would prefer to see the Ham Hobby grow by not scaring off people who might be intersted in getting a licence but are turned off by having to be tested by one of the modes of communication.
Posted by
KE4SMY on 2005-08-21
Huh???
"AMATURE RADIO MIGHT NEVER BE THE SAME AS THE OLD TIMERS KNOW IT....."
Amateur radio isn't the same as it was ten years ago, it was even more different twenty five years ago, and so on. This statement is really absurd--everything changes. Even driving a car isn't the same today as it was ten or twenty-five years ago.
Posted by
K1CJS on 2005-08-21
> Since the government is not doing the
> testing, the "more or less government"
> question does not apply.
The government is *mandating* the testing.
Care to try again?
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-21
> If Morse code is the "universal language"
> you claim it to be, how do I ask my
> friend in Beijing what he had for dinner
> last Tuesday, given that he speaks no
> English and I speak no mandarin."
> (Capitalization corrected)
If you're going to correct my capitalization, you should get it right. "Mandarin" is a proper noun.
> Yes, Morse code's commonality allows me
> and others the elegant ability to ask
> simple questions of those who have
> overlapping, but limited and rudimentary
> language skills through the use of Q
> signals and other abbreviations we hams
> have developed and learned over the
> years.
That's a lot of words, but it doesn't answer the question. There aren't any Q signals for any but a tiny set of messages. There definitely aren't any that cover the very ordinary question that I use in my example.
> We have a "language" of our own, quite
> similar to those youngsters who type
> those cryptic SMS messages back and forth
> to one another. Good CW operators are
> just more efficient that the SMS guys.
The kids using SMS don't have a "language". They've got a set of cryptic abbreviations for words in an existing language. In fact, kids in Germany use different cryptic abbreviations for texting than kids in the US do.
> Now, you answer me this. What
> demonstrated skill or knowledge base
> should future amateurs show or possess to
> obtain an HF license, especially the
> EXTRA CLASS license?
Well, see, there's a problem with this. The extra license merely grands one access to a tiny amount of spectrum. It's not even clear that there's any reason for such a license class to exist.
Actually, when you think of it, even the general license doesn't do much but grant one access to a tiny amount of spectrum, and extend the part of the hobby one can participate in by one facet. That facet, of course, being "easy dx".
So, if I wanted to make the barrier to entry match the prize one gets from entry, I'd say that for the general license, one should prove knowledge of DXing and QSL card processing, and for the extra class license, one should prove knowledge of the new band ranges one is allowed to operate in.
> Don't say the written tests, for the
> questions and answers are PUBLISHED; the
> known question and answer pool allows
> John Q. Public to memorize.
And yet, they don't. I'm a VE. I've tested a lot of people. While it is true that many people, especially those who wish to get into the hobby for EMCOMM, will cram for the tech test, I've yet to test anyone for a general or extra license who gave any evidence of having memorized the question pool.
> Today's tests don't actually measure
> anything. They do not measure the
> comprehension and general application of > fundamental radio communications
> principles.
If that's so, please explain why there are so many general and advanced ticket holders who have failed the extra test multiple times.
> So, should we just hand-out licenses to
> the cb'ers? Is that what you want?
I want the FCC to do its job properly. Amazingly enough, that job, in this instance, is to provide a system of testing that shows that one is prepared to *start* using the priviliges granted by a given license class.
> For me, it boils down to this. I do NOT
> want to give away precious spectrum to
> those who won't work for, and display, a
> demonstrated skill; as well as the
> understanding and comprehension of long-
> time radio practices, radio electronic
> theory, and the practical application
> thereof.
But this isn't about what you, or I, want. It's about what the FCC's proper role is. They are, after all, governed by federal law and international treaty.
What I want is for the hobby to be fun, and for the people who participate in it to enjoy it. The FCC's role should be limited to testing whether or not people understand radio regulations and on-air procedure well enough to do so without breaking the law.
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-20
Morseless license
I've been licensed since 1974. I am an advanced class holder. I am a senior rf engineer for a major telecommunications company. To pass the so called extra class license would be child's play. The reason I don't do it is that I got my ticket at an FCC office, under the watchful eye of an FCC examiner. No one can question whether I passed the test or "paid" for my ticket. I guess you now know my opinion on the VE program. I've met VE program extras that couldn't wire a microphone jack properly, but drive a new Porsche. I had not been active for about 13 years and fired up the rig. I tuned around the 20 meter band and was apalled at the "10-4 good buddy" lingo used by US amateurs. I'd expect it on 75 meters, but 20 ? Let's not let liberal whack job principles invade our spectrum. If you want to play here, you better be qualified, and prepared to pay for the PRIVILEGE. I'm in favor of canning the VE program COMPLETELY and having license fees reinstated to support an FCC administered examination program with morse as a major element. As a community of technical hobbyists, we can't allow ham radio to become more of an international embarassment than it already is. That's why God invented the citizens band.
WA1TAQ class of "74"
Posted by
WA1TAQ on 2005-08-20
Who can argue with this?
Codeless HF license is exactly equal to affirmative action in college and universities.
No-Code International is exactly equal to the ACLU.
It's all just another well organized giveaway for those seeking the sympathy vote.
Posted by
W4FSK on 2005-08-20
Nocode?
I barely obtained my 5wpm so that I could get my license, and I never use CW, however it is nice to be able to at least recognize some of it, and it is admirable to hear code at upwards of 20 to 30wpm... makes me envious. However, if code is dropped as a requirement to get HF privlidges, I am afraid of the number of ex-CBers coming over to cleaner air, and eventually dirtying it up. If they drop code as a requirement, they need to make the written testing MUCH harder. For example, one should be tested on whether he/she has the knowledge to DESIGN RF circuits out of a list of specifications desired... not just multiple choice, as in the past.
Posted by
N0LIC on 2005-08-20
Marty's Hot Air...
Dear Marty,
I was a VE under W5YI, ARRL, and AARC VEC's for over 12 years. Don't make the claim that you're experienced - you're NOT!
You're just full of HOT AIR!
I just realized your living in the San Francisco area -- that explains everything!
People like you would, or try to, give away every monetary gain and inalienable right traditional, hard-working, and long-standing Americans have earned in life. If you could, you would destroy America.
Relating to ham radio, your sick mind would create one license - one where you would send in a pittance to receive a "call-sign" - all without demonstrated skills or knowledge.
I think you need to read a local San Franciscan's book, Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, by Michael Savage.
You are the enemy.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-20
Marty's Hot Air...
Dear Marty,
I was a VE under W5YI, ARRL, and AARC VEC's for over 12 years. Don't make the claim that you're experienced - you're NOT!
You're just full of HOT AIR!
I just realized your living in the San Francisco area -- that explains everything!
People like you would, or try to, give away every monetary gain and inalienable right traditional, hard-working, and long-standing Americans have earned in life. If you could, you would destroy America.
Relating to ham radio, your sick mind would create one license - one where you would send in a pittance to receive a "call-sign" - all without demonstrated skills or knowledge.
I think you need to read a local San Franciscan's book, Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, by Michael Savage.
You are the enemy.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-20
Removal of CW - does it work?
Just a comment from New Zealand about the removal of CW as a test requirement. We had CW removed from our regulations in June 2004, 12 months ago. I have seen no adverse effects on operating procedure, no adverse effects on band usage, and any of the other matters raised as concerns here - maybe because we are low in the cycle or something but most people get onto the HF bands down here and wonder what all the fuss was about.
We also only have one licence class here now as well - pass the exam, go through a three month probation period and then you have a full licence. If you wish you can be tested in CW and receive a certificate for doing so.
Perhaps some analysis of what has been done in other countries, and their experiences may or not assist in helping you make up your mind if it is for America or not?
Just a few thoughts...
regards
Mark
ZL2UFI
Posted by
ZL2UFI on 2005-08-20
Talk about tooten your horn
WA1TAQ posted.
((I've been licensed since 1974. I am an advanced class holder. I am a senior rf engineer for a major telecommunications company. To pass the so called extra class license would be child's play))
I am glad to see your so hummble thank you
jeff n3jbh
Posted by
N3JBH on 2005-08-20
Morse code is the "universal language"
AE6IP Marty.
Morse code is the "universal language"
Dear Marty dont go there please. As a freind i can tell after i written a article here on eham. All i gotten was threats and hate mail.
And for all those who wonder yep i am a Tech. And if you wonder i do code. I just love the challange of the vhf/uhf Bands is all. So just never upgraded sorry folks
Posted by
N3JBH on 2005-08-20
and there you have it. I ask steve a simple question. he fails to answer it. I point out that he didn't answer it. He starts up the insults. Next, no doubt, he'll try the same thing here he tried in the forums, which is to accuse _me_ of being the one with the insults.
I'm still waiting, Steve. How do I ask my friend what he had for dinner last tuesday using your 'universal language' if he speaks no english and i speak no mandarin?
And while you're at it, if you're against memorization as a way of studying for a test, why is it that you're pushing so hard to keep element 1, which is the _only_ element that can _only_ be studied for by rote memorization?
I hope you don't mind if I don't read Savage. I'll take Thomas Jefferson's writings on liberals over his any day. Besides, given your attitude about san francisco, shouldn't you disrespect Savage as well?
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-20
Steve,
It dawned on my that I've got another question for you. I thought that "right-thinking" people such as yourself were against big government. Isn't that true? If so, shouldn't you be applying your philosophy of smaller government to the FCC? Wouldn't that mean that you'd want _less_ administrative interference in the hobby? Doesn't that mean you should be supporting my position, as it's the correct "right-thinking" position to take on government regulation?
Actually, I'd like to hear any of the folks who claim to be political conservatives but support more testing explain how they reconcile that with their "less government" attitudes.
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-20
>Here but not gone.
I am learning CW out of need, not because its currently requierd. It really is no longer the most efficient mode with low band conditions. Nor is it the most efficient. It is here and handy for given applications like V/UHF weak signal work.<
::So true. I like V/U weak signal work, too, and it's so common (as recently as last weekend, with the big E-skip session we had on Saturday) that when the going get tough, people switch to CW to resume contacts. WSJT would be even better, but takes too much time to set up. By the time I set up the program and do what needs to be done, the other station's gone. Switching to CW takes half a second, and gets the job done. About one-half of all my "DX" contacts on 6m (I have 107 countries) are "CW only" and never worked on SSB, mostly because they were never heard on SSB.
WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-19
Code / No Code
You have to keep at least 5 WPM for the general class ticket. The digital stuff is OK with no code because the CB set could care less about it. Go all no code on HF...we're sunk. We have seen far too many aspects of our society go the down the tubes due to politicians greasing the squeaky wheel rather than take a stand. But if that's what hams want... Does anyone know where I can find a cheap 50kw amp for the current police and fire bands?
This is a 'no brainer' kids.
Dan
Posted by
N1GXC on 2005-08-19
Those with CB handles
Why is it that most of the worthless comments come from those people that have CB 'handles' rather thn callsigns? Are they not hams? Are they embarassed by their comments? Do they want to rub elbows with the 'big guy's"? This is HAM radio forum. If your not a ham but would like to be someday....we would be more than happy to give you a hand but please conduct yourself in a reasonable manner much like a brand new young technician would. We would appreciate it and we would have a lot more respect for you.
Thanks, and I hope you get your ticket soon.
Dan
Dan
Posted by
N1GXC on 2005-08-19
AE6IP's Outnumbered Here...
Marty:
Have you seen the results of this somewhat controlled survey? You're outnumbered here. Do really think you're going to change long-standing hams' minds here?
Now for your response to my earlier post.
I said:
>> I noticed AE6IP couldn't wait long to
>> begin tearing it down. Just watch out --
>> He'll soon begin a rabid personal attack
>> when he finds you're sincere about your
>> well-founded, personal stance based on a
>> long-standing ham radio career.
Your response:
>For those of you who don't follow all of the >forum threads, the 'rabid personal attach' >being referred to here consists of telling >the gentleman to quote get off his lazy ass >unquote as a retorical response to his >assertion that a person i had described was >'lazy' because they wouldn't take the code >test.
>
>It appears that the gentleman would prefer >to make up a fantasy about my having >attacked him rather than answer a very >simple question about Morse code.
>
>If his behavior is indicative of what one >becomes like as part of the 'long >tradition', you can have it thanks.
>
>Fortunately, I've been on the air enough to >know that such individuals are, indeed, >rare.
First of all, in the "Italy Joins No-Code Ranks as FCC Revives Morse Debate in the US" eHam News article, my (NL7W) EXACT quote was:
"So, it sounds to me like you need to get your brilliant, but I assume lazy, electronics engineering friend in-gear, before it's too late. Convince him to tackle the challenge of Morse code -- before the "good old fashioned" ham ticket disappears forever."
So, as you can see, I did not use the language Marty decided I had said. I was civil and kind in my wording - unlike his own twisted "quoting" of my statement. I don't use the bad language he has (never have) - and turned around to make it look like I said.
Moreover, in my defense of the demonstrated skill requirement, Morse code, I stated that Ham Radio's skill and testing challenges in my teens ('81 through '89) helped me define and pursue a progressive career in telecommunications as a technician, engineer, and manager. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of revealing some personal career progression information. Marty, AE6IP, decided to attack my career and self at that standpoint -- without knowing anything about me other than what I revealed. I assume this is because of my staunch support of the retention of Morse code.
I have no idea why he would do and say things like this over such an issue like Morse code.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-19
AE6IP's Outnumbered Here...
Marty:
Have you seen the results of this somewhat controlled survey? You're outnumbered here. Do really think you're going to change long-standing hams' minds here?
Now for your response to my earlier post.
I said:
>> I noticed AE6IP couldn't wait long to
>> begin tearing it down. Just watch out --
>> He'll soon begin a rabid personal attack
>> when he finds you're sincere about your
>> well-founded, personal stance based on a
>> long-standing ham radio career.
Your response:
>For those of you who don't follow all of the >forum threads, the 'rabid personal attach' >being referred to here consists of telling >the gentleman to quote get off his lazy ass >unquote as a retorical response to his >assertion that a person i had described was >'lazy' because they wouldn't take the code >test.
>
>It appears that the gentleman would prefer >to make up a fantasy about my having >attacked him rather than answer a very >simple question about Morse code.
>
>If his behavior is indicative of what one >becomes like as part of the 'long >tradition', you can have it thanks.
>
>Fortunately, I've been on the air enough to >know that such individuals are, indeed, >rare.
First of all, in the "Italy Joins No-Code Ranks as FCC Revives Morse Debate in the US" eHam News article, my (NL7W) EXACT quote was:
"So, it sounds to me like you need to get your brilliant, but I assume lazy, electronics engineering friend in-gear, before it's too late. Convince him to tackle the challenge of Morse code -- before the "good old fashioned" ham ticket disappears forever."
So, as you can see, I did not use the language Marty decided I had said. I was civil and kind in my wording - unlike his own twisted "quoting" of my statement. I don't use the bad language he has (never have) - and turned around to make it look like I said.
Moreover, in my defense of the demonstrated skill requirement, Morse code, I stated that Ham Radio's skill and testing challenges in my teens ('81 through '89) helped me define and pursue a progressive career in telecommunications as a technician, engineer, and manager. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of revealing some personal career progression information. Marty, AE6IP, decided to attack my career and self at that standpoint -- without knowing anything about me other than what I revealed. I assume this is because of my staunch support of the retention of Morse code.
I have no idea why he would do and say things like this over such an issue like Morse code.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-19
NL7W said "I have no idea why he would do and say things like this over such an issue like Morse code."
It's because Marty only wants to cause trouble...he doesn't care about the FACTS, he just opposes anything the majority of folks want....in his sick mind, I guess he might actually believe some of the stuff he posts...but I can't imagine anyone mixed up enough to believe it all...
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-19
Do Away w/ CW Requirement
Someone has argued that one should be tested to use the CW subbands: Why ? If you took your last ham exam in the 70's like I did, you were not tested on any of the current digital modes, yet no one advocates being "re-tested" to use same, correct ? That to me is inconsistent thought.
The code is an anachronism that serves as an impediment for people wishing to enter the hobby ! We need new blood ! That is the core issue that many do not understand.
I am an avid CW operator: I doubt that anyone interested in Dxing will have much success w/o learning CW. There will always be advocates, which means many will learn and practice CW on their own. They can knock themselves out with code practice.
If the CW requirement is so important to becoming a ham, then I ask the following:
How many licensed hams have forgotten CW, and never plan to use it again ? Many ! That implies that the CW requirement for many is just a hurdle to a license. Let's test relevant competency in other areas of ham radio.
Let it go people ! CW is not important !
Posted by
K0SF on 2005-08-19
K0SF says "Do Away w/ CW Requirement"
“Someone has argued that one should be tested to use the CW subbands: Why? If you took your last ham exam in the 70's like I did, you were not tested on any of the current digital modes, yet no one advocates being ‘re-tested’ to use same, correct? That to me is inconsistent thought.”
I agree.
”The code is an anachronism that serves as an impediment for people wishing to enter the hobby! We need new blood! That is the core issue that many do not understand.”
Code is still important to amateur radio. It will always be. Yes we need new blood. But we need quality blood, not just anyone with a pulse. It takes a special kind of person to be a ham. Merely a love for radio, or a desire to communicate doesn’t make a ham. Hams have a thirst for knowledge of radio and electronics. The learning process never ends. Hams always wants to learn more, and learn something new. They have the desire to experiment and tinker. Hence, the clause in Part 97 about advancing the radio art. The communication end of ham radio is just a byproduct of the above-mentioned desires and drives of a real ham.
The real ham doesn’t perceive learning code as an impediment to entering the hobby. The real ham perceives learning code as a requirement to achieve, like the theory part of the exam in order to obtain the license. The real ham also perceives code as a tool necessary to utilize the full privileges he/she is licensed to use. The real ham knows that it is the lack of code proficiency that is the impediment, not the other way around.
Those that don’t use CW are only using half their frequency privileges. When band conditions are poor, they are at a disadvantage. The band may not appear to be open to them, while their code-proficient counterparts are making contacts on the lower 50 KHz of the band.
”I am an avid CW operator: I doubt that anyone interested in Dxing will have much success w/o learning CW. There will always be advocates, which means many will learn and practice CW on their own. They can knock themselves out with code practice.”
I agree.
”If the CW requirement is so important to becoming a ham, then I ask the following:
How many licensed hams have forgotten CW, and never plan to use it again? Many! That implies that the CW requirement for many is just a hurdle to a license. Let's test relevant competency in other areas of ham radio.”
Loads of licensed hams never used CW after passing their license exams. It is their loss. At times it makes me really wonder what motivated those people to get into amateur radio in the first place. Do they have a thirst for knowledge of radio and electronics? Do they have the unquenchable desire to learn, experiment and tinker? Or are they just communicators? Amateur radio was never meant to be a hobby of communicators. CB radio, FRS, GMRS, MURS and cell phones are for those who only want to communicate and have no desire to understand what makes their communication possible. People who have no desire to learn, tinker and experiment will never contribute to the advancement of the radio art.
”Let it go people! CW is not important!”
CW is important. It may not be essential, but it is important. Like I said in an earlier post, if the FCC is hell-bent on eliminating Element 1, they need to replace it with a more comprehensive written exam on electronics and radio theory, rules and regs, and operating procedure. Also, the question pools need to be removed from the public domain. Ham radio should not be made accessible to the masses by eliminating the only work that is still required for a license, which is learning code. Only those who are serious enough to put forth the work to get a ham license should be allowed to obtain a ham license. I have no problem with eliminating code testing, but don’t leave a vacuum. People need to work for their licenses. Raise the bar for the written exams.
Posted by
AG4RQ on 2005-08-19
Great Post...
AR4RQ:
"CW is important. It may not be essential, but it is important. Like I said in an earlier post, if the FCC is hell-bent on eliminating Element 1, they need to replace it with a more comprehensive written exam on electronics and radio theory, rules and regs, and operating procedure. Also, the question pools need to be removed from the public domain. Ham radio should not be made accessible to the masses by eliminating the only work that is still required for a license, which is learning code. Only those who are serious enough to put forth the work to get a ham license should be allowed to obtain a ham license. I have no problem with eliminating code testing, but don't leave a vacuum. People need to work for their licenses. Raise the bar for the written exams."
Great post... I'll reiterate and second your statement:
"Ham radio should not be made accessible to the masses by eliminating the only work that is still required for a license, which is learning code. Only those who are serious enough to put forth the work to get a ham license should be allowed to obtain a ham license."
Our once respectable service is being dismantled before my eyes. I really thought my teenage son would enjoy the same teenage ham radio challenges I did. Apparently this is not the case anymore. He'll end up getting his "Extra Class" faster and much easier than I did. He probably won't appreciate his license as much because of the lack of the learning and skill building processes necessary to earn the earlier licenses - those including 13 and 20 wpm.
So goes the great appreciation for the Ham Radio -- so goes the hobby in the long run.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-19
Great Post...
AR4RQ:
"CW is important. It may not be essential, but it is important. Like I said in an earlier post, if the FCC is hell-bent on eliminating Element 1, they need to replace it with a more comprehensive written exam on electronics and radio theory, rules and regs, and operating procedure. Also, the question pools need to be removed from the public domain. Ham radio should not be made accessible to the masses by eliminating the only work that is still required for a license, which is learning code. Only those who are serious enough to put forth the work to get a ham license should be allowed to obtain a ham license. I have no problem with eliminating code testing, but don't leave a vacuum. People need to work for their licenses. Raise the bar for the written exams."
Great post... I'll reiterate and second your statement:
"Ham radio should not be made accessible to the masses by eliminating the only work that is still required for a license, which is learning code. Only those who are serious enough to put forth the work to get a ham license should be allowed to obtain a ham license."
Our once respectable service is being dismantled before my eyes. I really thought my teenage son would enjoy the same teenage ham radio challenges I did. Apparently this is not the case anymore. He'll end up getting his "Extra Class" faster and much easier than I did. He probably won't appreciate his license as much because of the lack of the learning and skill building processes necessary to earn the earlier licenses - those including 13 and 20 wpm.
So goes the great appreciation for the Ham Radio -- so goes the hobby in the long run.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-19
Ahoy!
Codeless hams don't float my boat.
Posted by
K7FD on 2005-08-19
K7FD said "Codeless hams don't float my boat."
"Codeless hams"...is that an oxymoron ???
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-19
> Have you seen the results of this
> somewhat controlled survey?
Yes.
> You're outnumbered here. Do really think
> you're going to change long-standing
> hams' minds here?
Doesn't matter. Here isn't where the FCC makes its decisions.
> Now for your response to my earlier post.
> I said:
>>> Just watch out -- He'll soon begin a
>>> rabid personal attack
> Your response:
>> [...] a retorical response to his
>> assertion that a person i had described
>> was 'lazy' because they wouldn't take
>> the code test.
> First of all, in the "Italy Joins No-Code
> Ranks as FCC Revives Morse Debate in the
> US" eHam News article, my (NL7W) EXACT
> quote was:
>>> "So, it sounds to me like you need to >>> get your brilliant, but I assume lazy,
>>> electronics engineering friend in-gear,
> So, as you can see, I did not use the
> language Marty decided I had said. I was > civil and kind in my wording - unlike his
> own twisted "quoting" of my statement.
I'm sorry, but you need to read more carefully. I said you called my friend lazy. You're claiming I didn't by quoting yourself, in which quote, you call my friend lazy. I didn't misquote you.
> Marty, AE6IP, decided to attack my career
> and self at that standpoint -- without
> knowing anything about me other than what
> I revealed.
Actually, I no more did that than that I misquoted you. You _did_ call my friend lazy. And I did _not_ attack you or your career. The irony, of course, is that you demand the right to judge others, but become very sanctimonious if someone should offer a judgement of you.
> I have no idea why he would do and say
> things like this over such an issue like
> Morse code.
Like _what_? You called my friend lazy, with no knowledge about him. In reply, I told you to "get off your lazy ass", as a parody of your own behavior.
The _real_ reason you're throwing up this smoke screen is because you're not willing to answer a very simple question.
1) If morse code is the "universal language" you claim it to be, how do I ask my friend in beijing what he had for dinner last tuesday, given that he speaks no english and i speak no mandarin."
Care to answer the question, or are you going to just make more crazy accusations?
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-19
> Have you seen the results of this
> somewhat controlled survey?
Yes.
> You're outnumbered here. Do really think
> you're going to change long-standing
> hams' minds here?
Doesn't matter. Here isn't where the FCC makes its decisions.
> Now for your response to my earlier post.
> I said:
>>> Just watch out -- He'll soon begin a
>>> rabid personal attack
> Your response:
>> [...] a retorical response to his
>> assertion that a person i had described
>> was 'lazy' because they wouldn't take
>> the code test.
> First of all, in the "Italy Joins No-Code
> Ranks as FCC Revives Morse Debate in the
> US" eHam News article, my (NL7W) EXACT
> quote was:
>>> "So, it sounds to me like you need to >>> get your brilliant, but I assume lazy,
>>> electronics engineering friend in-gear,
> So, as you can see, I did not use the
> language Marty decided I had said. I was > civil and kind in my wording - unlike his
> own twisted "quoting" of my statement.
I'm sorry, but you need to read more carefully. I said you called my friend lazy. You're claiming I didn't by quoting yourself, in which quote, you call my friend lazy. I didn't misquote you.
> Marty, AE6IP, decided to attack my career
> and self at that standpoint -- without
> knowing anything about me other than what
> I revealed.
Actually, I no more did that than that I misquoted you. You _did_ call my friend lazy. And I did _not_ attack you or your career. The irony, of course, is that you demand the right to judge others, but become very sanctimonious if someone should offer a judgement of you.
> I have no idea why he would do and say
> things like this over such an issue like
> Morse code.
Like _what_? You called my friend lazy, with no knowledge about him. In reply, I told you to "get off your lazy ass", as a parody of your own behavior.
The _real_ reason you're throwing up this smoke screen is because you're not willing to answer a very simple question.
1) If morse code is the "universal language" you claim it to be, how do I ask my friend in beijing what he had for dinner last tuesday, given that he speaks no english and i speak no mandarin."
Care to answer the question, or are you going to just make more crazy accusations?
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-19
Marty's question answered.
AE6IP said:
"1) If Morse code is the "universal language" you claim it to be, how do I ask my friend in Beijing what he had for dinner last Tuesday, given that he speaks no English and I speak no mandarin." (Capitalization corrected)
Care to answer the question, or are you going to just make more crazy accusations?"
Yes, Morse code's commonality allows me and others the elegant ability to ask simple questions of those who have overlapping, but limited and rudimentary language skills through the use of Q signals and other abbreviations we hams have developed and learned over the years. We have a "language" of our own, quite similar to those youngsters who type those cryptic SMS messages back and forth to one another. Good CW operators are just more efficient that the SMS guys.
Now, you answer me this. What demonstrated skill or knowledge base should future amateurs show or possess to obtain an HF license, especially the EXTRA CLASS license?
Don't say the written tests, for the questions and answers are PUBLISHED; the known question and answer pool allows John Q. Public to memorize. Today's tests don't actually measure anything. They do not measure the comprehension and general application of fundamental radio communications principles. Today's published question-pool tests do nothing to ensure comprehension and practical application of basic radio electronics.
So, should we just hand-out licenses to the cb'ers? Is that what you want?
For me, it boils down to this. I do NOT want to give away precious spectrum to those who won't work for, and display, a demonstrated skill; as well as the understanding and comprehension of long-time radio practices, radio electronic theory, and the practical application thereof.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-19
Let's put the blame squarely where it belongs on this: The FCC & IARU. Together, they have done away with the Morse Code requirement. Furthermore, the FCC has allowed the exams to be dumbed down. Why are the exam questions in the pool published? Is that not idiotic? Ah, well, we can blame big government for this f^&k up. Mr. Bush & his cronies will feel the brunt of my anger come this November. As for the CW requirement, I think it's already basically a done deal.
Posted by
WB2GOF on 2005-08-19
Why are we making our cases here in this very public forum? This will have no effect on the outcome of the FCC decision. Make your voices heard by filing a response at the FCC website! By fighting this issue publicly here (like little children I might add), we detract from the hobby for everyone who comes to this website to see what it's all about. SHAME ON ALL OF YOU NAMECALLERS, BOTH PRO & CON!
Posted by
WB2GOF on 2005-08-19
No Clue
AE6IP still has not got a clue...maybe once he gets some REAL experience in ham radio he will change his opinions....but until then, he just needs to shut up and quit embarrassing himself....
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-19
Radio - Is that why you hide behind that handle instead of your callsign? Because you have more experience than AE6IP? Prove it!
Posted by
WB2GOF on 2005-08-19
WB2GOF, I have nothing to prove...I was licensed in 1982, and had my callsign BEFORE the "Bash" books came out...remember them ??? They were publishing the test questions before they were legally published...LOL....Marty is nothing but a troublemaker, and NEVER has anything constructive to say......his FAR OUT views on this board make ham radio look bad....
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-19
Eliminating code against majority wishes
This survey illustrates what everybody knows. Namely, that ARRL pushes an adjenda that is AGAINST the wishes of the majority ham community. The real question is WHY?
I think the answer is $$$$$$$
What do you think???
W9WHE
Posted by
W9WHE-II on 2005-08-19
Monkey-Boy
Yep, and your reading every word of it CB-Boy.
But you prove my point that CW operators DO cuss using CW!
YOU are the only disgrace to the amateur radio community here. You just demonstrated this by losing it in your last post.
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-18
Wrong Question
Removing the CW testing requirement from the HF license affects each of the fundamental principles and purposes of Part 97 as follows (from Part 97.1):
"(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications."
Not sure how much CW is used for emergency communications. My guess, when compared with other modes, probably not much.
"(b) Continuation and extension of the amateur�s proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art."
Radio's "state of the art" has moved well beyond the technology of continuous wave transmission
"(c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur service through rules which provide for advancing skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art."
CW is definitely a skill, one of the tougher ones on this planet to conquer. Harder than learning to type! But it's not clear that having a "rule" about it "advances ... the art."
"(d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts.
Removing the CW requirement from the license would seem to support this last one.
That all having been said, one could argue that the simple action of removing the CW requirement from the licensing procedure "may do damage to the bands (lids, etc.)." This is simply an indication that the CW requirement was being used as some sort of proxy for something else. To the degree that the CW requirement was somehow preventing opportunistic pollution of the bands, then testing requirements must be reviewed in other areas to ensure that (d) is furthered. The removal of the CW requirement must not result in any lowering of any standards.
In my humble opionin, then, the only valid comment to the FCC on their proposal is that the removal of the morse code requirement from amateur testing procedures is probably appropriate, however we have valid and grave concerns that the lowering of standards - any standards regarding amateur testing - will lower the standard of operator and thus violate part (d) of Part 97.1, and therefore the removal of CW as a requirement can only truly be debated within the context of a debate regarding testing procedures overall. And since such an overall review is not being proposed or entertained as part of the proposal to drop the morse code testing requirement, the proposal should be REJECTED.
Or did I miss something?
73
Posted by
AC6RM on 2005-08-18
Wrong Question
Removing the CW testing requirement from the HF license affects each of the fundamental principles and purposes of Part 97 as follows (from Part 97.1):
"(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications."
Not sure how much CW is used for emergency communications. My guess, when compared with other modes, probably not much.
"(b) Continuation and extension of the amateur�s proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art."
Radio's "state of the art" has moved well beyond the technology of continuous wave transmission
"(c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur service through rules which provide for advancing skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art."
CW is definitely a skill, one of the tougher ones on this planet to conquer. Harder than learning to type! But it's not clear that having a "rule" about it "advances ... the art."
"(d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts.
Removing the CW requirement from the license would seem to support this last one.
That all having been said, one could argue that the simple action of removing the CW requirement from the licensing procedure "may do damage to the bands (lids, etc.)." This is simply an indication that the CW requirement was being used as some sort of proxy for something else. To the degree that the CW requirement was somehow preventing opportunistic pollution of the bands, then testing requirements must be reviewed in other areas to ensure that (d) is furthered. The removal of the CW requirement must not result in any lowering of any standards.
In my humble opionin, then, the only valid comment to the FCC on their proposal is that the removal of the morse code requirement from amateur testing procedures is probably appropriate, however we have valid and grave concerns that the lowering of standards - any standards regarding amateur testing - will lower the standard of operator and thus violate part (d) of Part 97.1, and therefore the removal of CW as a requirement can only truly be debated within the context of a debate regarding testing procedures overall. And since such an overall review is not being proposed or entertained as part of the proposal to drop the morse code testing requirement, the proposal should be REJECTED.
Or did I miss something?
73
Posted by
AC6RM on 2005-08-18
<<"If that is so then why do many of these SAME operators get on phone and cuss people out and tell them they don't like them because their not the same color they are? So because they don't do this via CW but rather phone that makes it okay? You people are sick in the head.">>
Couldn't be the Ham's doing this are really CBer's, who got through the last time we dropped the standards could it? You ASSume every miscreant Ham on SSB is a CW op who like to roam in the SSB section raising hell, and not someone who learned the code at the meager 5wpm rate just to get HF privi's. It's been five years.
More than likely the trouble makers on SSB are slackers of your CW hating ilk.
<<"So where are the high-standards with these people? They know and regularly use CW so they should be immune from this (they hammer us by saying those who know CW DON'T do this). Yeah right. Tell us all another one.">>
How would you know that? I would bet you've never even been down in the CW portions of the bands, or that you could copy a call to make the comparison.
More ASSumption.
Most people who operate CW for any length of time don't wander up into the great unwashed hoard which is SSB.
Posted by
AC0H on 2005-08-18
DROPPING CW
The ham of "today" really hit me when in conversation with a new "Extra Class", he absolutely was unable to comprehend that a cordless phone has an input frequency different from the output frequency of the base unit.
I really hate what the FCC and the ARRL have done to ham radio in the last 26 years. You won't be getting much in the way of innovation and invention from guys who cannot even understand the every day operation of their rig. I know a general class ham who cannot understand how to change from SSB to AM on his radio. And he's had his rig for over two years.
Posted by
N4VNV on 2005-08-18
Code Elimination
I've never uttered an off color remark via amateur radio to the best of my knowledge or recollection. I also don't operate much on SSB and 75 meters would be my last choice in phone bands on which to operate. I suspect that many other cw ops fit the same description.
Posted by
WA4DOU on 2005-08-18
KC4UEB is Loosing it !!
UEB is apparently loosing it. He seems to rant on with the same senseless babbling each time someone tries to reason with him. He keeps posting total nonsense and bull. If this all goes thru, we will see this "work of art" on the air. It will be interesting what he will have to say then...... Probably more senseless babling.
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-18
<<"UEB is apparently loosing it.">>
He's not alone and it's not confined to the NCT and Tech+'s among us. There seems to be an underlying HATRED of anything and anyone who support keeping the CW requirement.
Hating people because they use a mode of communication you've never learned or tried could be called irrational at best and paranoia at worst.
The funny thing is if they spent as much time using or learning CW as they do on the NCI website or bitching about it here they'd have better understanding and might actually enjoy it.
Posted by
AC0H on 2005-08-18
CW is History!
Oh well . . .
No matter your position on this subject, the good news is that CW will be eliminated very soon from testing requirements. There's nothing you can do about it but you all will just have to deal with it.
That's the bottom line here. CW is history.
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-18
<<"CW is history">>
Probably as a testing requirement, but not as a useful mode of communication on the bands. I expect to see an influx of CW ops as they get tired of SSB. The more the merrier.
CW.......those that can do.....those that can't whine about it.
Posted by
AC0H on 2005-08-18
Dropping code requirement
Personally, I love CW and use it all the time. However, I also recognize that it isn't for everybody. Time and technology march on and so should the subject matter used by the FCC in their exams. Morse Code has a wonderful history to it. However, today I think it is more important for people to demonstrate their understanding of FCC rules, regulations, radio fundamentals and operating procedures than how well they can master CW. Once licensed, if they then decide to learn CW and use it on the air, then that's great.
Posted by
KK9H on 2005-08-18
I couldn't agree more
>Dropping code requirement
Personally, I love CW and use it all the time. However, I also recognize that it isn't for everybody. Time and technology march on and so should the subject matter used by the FCC in their exams. Morse Code has a wonderful history to it. However, today I think it is more important for people to demonstrate their understanding of FCC rules, regulations, radio fundamentals and operating procedures than how well they can master CW. Once licensed, if they then decide to learn CW and use it on the air, then that's great.
Posted by KK9H on August 18, 2005<
::That's great, and I sure agree. Problem is, we don't have any test that "demonstrates understanding of..." all that stuff you list. We have a test that's multiple-choice, with published answers, that *demonstrates* absolutely nothing. If we had an actual *operating* examination, I'd be all for dropping the code test. But we don't, and we never did, and I doubt we ever will have such a test. Pity.
WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-18
Code test should be replaced, not eliminated
" We have a test that's multiple-choice, with published answers, that *demonstrates* absolutely nothing."
This is a problem that no other country faced when they eliminated code testing. We are the only country that publishes the question pools with the answers, and makes them available to the public. All that is tested is a person's ability to memorize something. In the US, learning code is the only work that anyone has to do to get a ham license. If we are to eliminate code testing, it needs to be replaced with a more comprehensive written exam on electronic and radio theory, rules and regs, and operating procedure. Also, the question pools need to be taken out of the public domain. England has a good system. You need to attend a class before you even take a test. When you take the test, you had better know your stuff if you want to pass.
Posted by
AG4RQ on 2005-08-18
Content
Too bad we can't have more comments like N4KZ's. Well thought out, few if any errors in grammer and spelling, and not 'in your face'. I've been a ham since 1959 and I am a 20 WPM Extra. But, I am glad to see all newcomers to the hobby. We all start learning at some level and there needs to more effort at the 'Elmer' end, not calling newcomers lids, etc. I happen to disagree with N4KZ, but only from an old CW man's point of view. I agree with the view that ham radio has 'survived' a lot of changes in the last 30 years and it will 'survive' the removal of code as a testing requirement. However, the 'in your face', name calling, and profanity that seems to pervade ALL the eHam posts will be the eventual death of the hobby. We are supposed to be a proud fraternity, not a bunch of low-minded gutter trash fighting among ourselves. Why not keep the disagreement civil and present logical arguments?
Posted by
K4ZMV on 2005-08-18
New Amateur Radio NO-Code Exam
NEW AMATEUR RADIO LICENSE EXAM
The new amateur radio test is here. A few changes have been made.
The new test has been designed so that the same test can be given
for all license classes. To qualify for the higher classes of
license, all you have to do is score better on the test. This makes
things so much simpler for VE's.
I have included a copy of the new exam.
====================================================================
Please PRINT (that means no squiggly lines)
YOUR NAME (what they call you)
__________________________________________
ADDRESS (where you live)
_______________________________________________
BIRTH DATE (when you were born) ________________________________
EXAM INSTRUCTIONS:
Make a circle (one of these round things O ) around the letter of the
best answer! This is so we know what your answer to the question is!
1. You TALK into a microphone with your _______.
A. Hands
B. Feet
C. Toes
D. Mouth
E. Armpits
2. When you talk into a microphone, you talk into _______.
A. the front
B. the back
C. the top
D. the bottom
E. the wire
3. "HEADPHONES" are worn over the ___________.
A. Knees
B. Eyes
C. Toes
D. Ears
E. Lips
4. What do you do with the AC line cord coming out of a power
supply?
A. Hold it in the air to pick up signals
B. Pull on it to start the motor
C. Talk into the plug to get real "skip DX"
D. Hook it to your antenna
E. Insert the plug into a source of power
5. A "two meter" radio is:
A. twice as strong as a one-meter radio
B. two one-meter radios in series
C. a CB with two meters on the front panel
D. a good doorstop
E. a monoband radio
6. A "ten-foot mast" is how long?
A. Three meters
B. Ten pounds
C. Two meters
D. Tree-top tall
E. Same length as basketball hoop is high
7. A "Triband antenna" is made to work on how many bands?
A. 1
B. 2
C. 3
D. 4
E. 10
8. The "Marconi" antenna is named after:
A. Marconi
B. Mantovani
C. macaroni
D. Dean Martin
E. martini
9. What colors of DIODES can you buy at a Radio Shack store?
A. Red, blue and black
B. Red, yellow and green
C. Orange and brown
D. I am color blind so this is a discriminatory question and
I should automatically get a waiver on this question.
E. I have no intention of ever using DIODES, so don't care what
color they are.
10. What color of SLURPEE can you buy at 7-11?
A. Red, blue and black
B. Red, yellow and green
C. Orange and brown
D. I am color blind so this is a discriminatory question and
I should get another waiver on this question. I now have two
questions right.
E. All the above
11. You have just installed your new mobile rig in your vehicle
and you are still parked at the curb, you need to pull out
into traffic and you are talking to another station?
A. You put down the mic long enough to signal that you intend
to pull away from the curb
B. You keep on talking and just pull out in traffic
C. You open your left rear door to signal that you want to pull
out in traffic, while calling CQ DX on the repeater
D. You install a light bulb at the top of your antenna so that it
will flash when you are talking on the radio and people will
then know to let you out
END OF EXAM.
YOUR SIGNATURE (slap yo tag here)
_________________________________________
====================================================================
SCORING:
Get FOUR correct and you get an EXTRA!!!!
Get THREE right and you get an ADVANCED!!!!
Get TWO right and you get a GENERAL!!!
Get ONE right and you get a TECHNICIAN!!!
Get None right. Go back out in parking lot and study another five
minutes. When you are done, come back in and try again.
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-18
Code Elimination
I belive that the operator's that have a problem with change should have to demo there own ideas. I feel these people have a real hang up and believe they should dictate whats right for everyone. If what they say is the only way to look at this cw is that because; "I had to learn it you should have to learn it to" attitude they are missing out on what the ham is or should be all about. We promote this as a family oriented hobby and try to recruit new people all the time . Don't old hams after all, use some of the latest technology availble today? If they see fit to use the new technology, why are they still trying to keep ham in the past? I would agree with more education of rules and reg's of the fcc along with more education, to the understanding electronics but I also would say let all the people enjoy the true meaning of the Ham Operator. If we really want to keep this hobby alive and it depends on new people to get involved we must change just like we drive a car. We do not have to take a test to drive a new car although we have never driven one why should we have to learn something we dont need or want to use? I dont keep things at my home I dont need or use why should I have to learn cw and not use it ?
Posted by
INDIANHEADMAN on 2005-08-18
> I noticed AE6IP couldn't wait long to
> begin tearing it down. Just watch out --
> he'll soon begin a rabid personal attack
> when he finds you're sincere about your
> well-founded, personal stance based on a
> long-standing ham radio career.
For those of you who don't follow all of the forum threads, the 'rabid personal attach' being refered to here consists of telling the gentleman to quote get off his lazy ass unquote as a retorical response to his assertion that a person i had described was 'lazy' because they wouldn't take the code test.
It appears that the gentleman would prefer to make up a fantasy about my having attacked him rather than answer a very simple question about Morse code.
If his behavior is indicative of what one becomes like as part of the 'long tradition', you can have it thanks.
Fortunately, I've been on the air enough to know that such individuals are, indeed, rare.
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-18
> AE6IP, it sounds like you have not been a
> Ham long enough to have listened to 75
> Meters before it went south.
First, one doesn't have to be a ham to listen to amateur transmissions.
Second, since I was born long after the old man started writing about bad hams in QST, it's safe to say that no, I wasn't a ham before the band "went south".
Third, while it might have "gone south" coincident with the FCC reduction in tech requirements, at that time the CW requirement for HF access was still as strict. So if you want to pick on the FCC for the decline in the band, you should not be concerned with the CW requirement, as it's demonstrably unrelated to the problem.
Finally, your arguments would be a lot more convincing if it weren't that so many of the potty mouths on the band have been licenses for a lot longer than when you say the trouble started.
Our own local bad boy got his first HF access in 1955.
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-18
Whale Poop Put Downs
I am against dropping CW as a test requirement. That said, I tire of those who constantly complain about CB incursions and if you ain't working CW your nothing more than whale sh-t. I suspect those that who do CW put downs may have more in common with the CB crowd when it comes tack and intelligence.
Posted by
KG6AMW on 2005-08-17
KC4UEB said "However, there are many who feel things will be improving with this change and it's up to those who don't have this "I'm better than you" attitude to continue to allow people to excel in their own way within their own talents in this hobby without allowing all the radio bigots to kill a good hobby for everyone else."
Who has the "I'm better than you" attitude ??...YOU better look in the mirror....YOU are basically saying that since YOU are "better" than the rest of us, so YOU shouldn't have to take the code test....you can't get much more arrogant than that folks.....so KC4UEB, tell me what makes you so special that you shouldn't have to test the same way I did ???
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-17
Make it separate.
After much contemplation, I have come to the conclusion that dropping the CW requirement (s) for Amateur licensing is a progressive move. Let's face it: the techonologies that exist today for communcation are so ubiquitous and so easy to utilize that there is an oveall "tarnishing" of the allure of ham radio. If any youngster can turn on a computer, connect to the internet, and use VOIP to talk to people anyware on the planet, then why would that child want to work hard at learning facts, figures, math, and CW?
I'll tell you why! Radio still instills a deep facination with many people. Helping others by providing public service attacts many folks who want to be better citizens & "give something back" to their communities. Others enjoy the friendship and fun activites that come with this hobby.
However, as technology and time march on, fewer and fewer people will want to put effort into CW. Once upon a time, if you wanted to chat with someone overseas, you either paid a huge amount of money for a long-distance telephone call, or you used ham radio. So, the options were limited and one was forced to meet the requirements if one wanted to achieve the goal (i.e., becoming a ham). Today, as I've stated, there are too many other options for people to achieve the same goals that require NO special training, knowledge, or skill. This has taken the wind out of the sails for ham radio.
I personally believe that CW has always been, and will continue to be, the best SIMPLEST form of radio communication. I continue to feel it has many advantages over voice and other digital modes. Though I rarely use CW, I feel proud to have learned it and know that, if needed, I could use it again.
I feel that as a REQUIREMENT to licensing, CW is holding the hobby back. I DO think that the FCC & ARRL should seriously consider a SEPARATE license/certificate for CW provision, to add next to your ham license. This would allow a more formal way to track the CW ops that REALLY know the code, and could be called upon easily.
Posted by
KF4LVC on 2005-08-17
KC4UEB is a Tech +
RADIO123US,
KC4UEB is not an NCT who refuses to take a code test. Look up his call in the 1993 QRZ database on qrz.com. He became a Technician class licensee on 11/20/90. He is either one who loathed every minute he had to spend to pass the code test when there were no codeless licenses, or he is a troublemaking troll just looking to stir up trouble and wants attention. KC4UEB would be considered a Tech Plus or a Technician with Morse Code. Pay no mind to his anti-code rants.
73
UG
Posted by
URBANGORILLA on 2005-08-17
Make it separate.
After much contemplation, I have come to the conclusion that dropping the CW requirement (s) for Amateur licensing is a progressive move. Let's face it: the techonologies that exist today for communcation are so ubiquitous and so easy to utilize that there is an oveall "tarnishing" of the allure of ham radio. If any youngster can turn on a computer, connect to the internet, and use VOIP to talk to people anyware on the planet, then why would that child want to work hard at learning facts, figures, math, and CW?
I'll tell you why! Radio still instills a deep facination with many people. Helping others by providing public service attacts many folks who want to be better citizens & "give something back" to their communities. Others enjoy the friendship and fun activites that come with this hobby.
However, as technology and time march on, fewer and fewer people will want to put effort into CW. Once upon a time, if you wanted to chat with someone overseas, you either paid a huge amount of money for a long-distance telephone call, or you used ham radio. So, the options were limited and one was forced to meet the requirements if one wanted to achieve the goal (i.e., becoming a ham). Today, as I've stated, there are too many other options for people to achieve the same goals that require NO special training, knowledge, or skill. This has taken the wind out of the sails for ham radio.
I personally believe that CW has always been, and will continue to be, the best SIMPLEST form of radio communication. I continue to feel it has many advantages over voice and other digital modes. Though I rarely use CW, I feel proud to have learned it and know that, if needed, I could use it again.
I feel that as a REQUIREMENT to licensing, CW is holding the hobby back. I DO think that the FCC & ARRL should seriously consider a SEPARATE license/certificate for CW provision, to add next to your ham license. This would allow a more formal way to track the CW ops that REALLY know the code, and could be called upon easily.
Posted by
KF4LVC on 2005-08-17
code
To keep the code funny you asked.
We dont have code requirement now try retesting any one with a 5 wpm ticket they have had over one year. Have a passing score of 70 and give 10 points for every different letter they can send and receive. How many out of a Hundred would pass? And by the way the FCC has already decided to end it and if 100% of comments were against it they would do it anyway. The best way to keep the code is to use the code and if you listen to cw bands thousands of Hams are doing just that every day and using less precious radio spectrum that the latest digital what-u-may-call-it.
Posted by
K5SOH on 2005-08-17
Comming To a Power Line Near You
Keep up the good Fight Girls this group getting fun to read ever day,Loads of fun.And getting to see all the jokers..Can You Say BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL....
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-17
Comming To a Power Line Near You
Keep up the good Fight Girls this group getting fun to read ever day,Loads of fun.And getting to see all the jokers..Can You Say BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL....
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-17
Every one has to lighten up !
Like I said earlier... It dosen't even remotely matter what we as a "democratic people" want. We have a government here in the "good ole" U.S.A. who makes decisions for us regardless of how we want things to be. YOUR VOTE MEANS NOTHING !
Just a little humor for us here to "lighten up"...
Amateur one,
"How do you distinguish new licensees who have no-code HF privs that came from VHF & UHF bands from hams who had to learn the morse code to get their HF privs?"
Amateur two,
"I guess you just ask;...I don't know because there is no obvious designation factor."
Amateur one,
"No, they'll be the ones "waiting for the beep" after you end your transmission."
hardy har har harrrrrr hi hi hi
Posted by
N8NSN on 2005-08-17
A comment to N2BR
Can you imagine all the lamers who go out and purchase "smart appliances" for their lie they fell into on matters concerning the "BPL"? How will they "feel" when these appliances don't function correctly due to all the amateurs running full legal limit transmitters that are RFing the powerlines... HA HA HA
Maybe this "new licensing committment" has a silver lining to the clowd it represents...
BPL is a big controversy. In theory it works... but as they say in the big cities... "looked good on paper" (again HA HA HA)
Posted by
N8NSN on 2005-08-17
A commentary on "knowing morse code" for pontification
SO WE LOST THE CODE REQUIREMENT FOR TESTING... WHO CARES; WE STILL HAVE IT AS A MODE TO "CHOOSE TO USE"
If you're having trouble learning the code please, don't give up. The code (any code) can be learned if you "need to know a code".
The deaf (or hearing impaired) can learn the code via light... even with the help of technical knowledge a person can implement a light to the voltage of the speaker connections to work cw (on any band or any radio)...light is as any energy "spectrum":...Manipulable.
The fire age of humanity brought on the advent of smoke signals ...a "code" communication forum dating back to the ages of fire (perhaps back even further).
I find it interesting that in all the articles read on the issue, no one mentioned this; Remember in the 80's when a group of hostiles in Iran took over our American embassy over there ? DID YOU KNOW THAT MORSE CODE SAVED THE HOSTAGES IN THAT SITUATION ??? WELL, IT DID... When the "hostiles" filmed the hostages; The hostages were "scripted" on what to say in order to tell the United States government that the matters at hand was not a "torturous" situation. WELL ! An Air Force Official, here in Dayton, Ohio at Wright Patterson A.F.B, was reviewing the tapes and noticed one of the hostages was blinking out the word TORTURE (in Morse code)with his EYEBALLS... (back to the smoke signals we arrive with visual "code") We all want to assume that we or anyone in our "circle" would never be in any situation like that; Right? Who knows where any of us will be in our lives. If this type of extreme tragedy were ever to befall any one I would sure hope someone in the situation and in a position to render effective communications help ...KNOWS THE CODE.
The difference with knowing the code or not knowing the code is this. Lets say all the modern IC type "plug and play" equipment in some shack takes a lightning strike, static hit or any other destructive energy intrusion (naturally occurring or otherwise i.e. nuclear contamination etc.) and melts the IC components into pools of uselessness... perhaps the small one tube transmitter in that shack which someone built or bought at a flea market that is a cw only rig will help someone help others. Just a made up situation to ponder on and not intended to offend or alarm anyone.
I'm glad there are a few old tube type rigs accessible here and/or the knowledge of how to build a very crude but usable, cw capable radio with any attainable voltage source, some wire, some hand made copper plate capacitors and a little chunk of selenium stashed away in an old shoe box. (remember the cat whiskers ? ...before my time)
Many things in life require a LICENSE to maintain the safety, integrity and structure of any number of "PRIVILEGES". Driving a car is a privilege granted to those who show basic operational skills of a motorized vehicle and the knowledge of the basic laws governing the driving task. Remember driving a vehicle or obtaining a driving license is a PRIVILEGE ...not a "RIGHT". Same goes for Amateur radio... The basics first philosophy keeps order to the structure of amateur radio as well, yadda yadda yadda
The very basics of any type of communications must be understood and adhered to because the "basics" are the key component to any type of gainful endeavor.
Nothing useful is built from the top down". (unless we're talking about dropping a "slinky" from a window or balcony to use as an antenna...hi hi "attempt at humor")
I learn as much from my own research as I learn from observing others who know absolutely nothing. (Can I purchase a quote right on that)
73 & GL to those at least trying to learn the code,
KC8BYF
Jimmie
Posted by
N8NSN on 2005-08-17
BPL BPL BPL BPL BPL
I think it funny to read this part on Eham,Its funny to read all the comments from Morse Code { THATS CW IN CASE SOME HAVE FORGOT} CB'ers and so on.Yep it going to be a big Gas when i turn on my HF Rig Fire Up my Big Amp,And start sending CW { O-Sorry I ForGot THAT MORSE Code}.Nothing Worng with morse code and the CBers the way i look at it.Most CBers i know are Extra Class license Ham's,That took the code and never bitch about it either.And there great ham's too,Lots better than some of the local so called hams i know here.O-Well carrie on the fight i think most comments are a good joke anyway....Keep it Clean Girls.....
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-17
CW requires EFFORT! It is what separated us from them (the cb'ers). 5 wpm let a few cb'ers in the door (we even have our share on 75 meters here in Alaska). As most know, the written tests won't keep them out, as the questions and answers are published.
Be sure to welcome the unwashed trickle of new cb'ers to our now-denigrated ham bands. I predict 20 meters will become the new, reborn, Citizens' Band.
I can't wait to hear those new 150 to 200-watt, 20 meter, Ranger and Uniden radios driving single 3-500Z amps to new levels of distortion.
A few days of that will peg my fun meter -for good.
73, it was fun while it lasted.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-17
RADIO123US:
I never said I don't have to learn CW. I never even said anything about not wanting to learn it. In fact, I DID learn CW when I got my license. Although I don't care for the mode I never said I was too good to have to learn it. You made that part up yourself.
As for what makes me special: Nothing. I don't have to do anything as far as CW goes. The FCC will be eliminating it very soon so you can complain to them about it. But don't be ticked at those who will be doing whatever the current requirement is in order to get on HF. If the FCC eliminates CW testing be mad at them, not the poor soul who is just doing what the requirements say they have to do in order to get on HF.
URBANMONKEY:
Your statements carry no clout whatsoever, and you don't even provide any proof you're even a licensed amateur radio operator. Using a CB handle doesn't qualify you as anything more than a troll yourself. At least what I state here is factual information. I still don't see anyone addressing the issue of all those great and wonderful CW operators being better hams for having learned CW, while the HF band is FILLED with filthy language and racial comments by these same high-quality operators. So why are these people (who learned CW and regularly use it) not abiding by the high-standards they claim exist in the HF band? Just how did learning and using CW somehow slip by them by not making them the upstanding amateur citizens they would have us think they are just because they learned CW?
Apparently no one wants to touch that one. And that's because no one has so much as a reasonable answer for it. The truth is CW doesn't act as a filter of any kind. It doesn't keep the riff-raff out because many of these wonderful CW operators fill the HF band (using phone) with vulgarity like you rarely even hear on channel 19!
So where are the high-standards with these people? They know and regularly use CW so they should be immune from this (they hammer us by saying those who know CW DON'T do this). Yeah right. Tell us all another one.
The end result is there are double standards when it comes to this crap. We're all told how CW op's are always courteous and never lose their temper, and how they make ham radio the hobby it is. If that is so then why do many of these SAME operators get on phone and cuss people out and tell them they don't like them because their not the same color they are? So because they don't do this via CW but rather phone that makes it okay? You people are sick in the head.
That's why you don't have any sympathy from us. People like you have hammered us all these years saying your so much better than everyone else. The truth is your WORSE. And now your time is almost up and you won't be able to hammer people with the almighty CW and how it makes you a better amateur. Your pissed because even the FCC is casting aside your beloved mode.
I say "Tough Luck". If people like you hadn't been beating people over the head with your gold-plated CW sword maybe folks would be a little more forgiving. But the tables are about to turn and these people I'm talking about want nothing to do with you. Selling your radio gear and getting out of the hobby would probably be the best thing you could do.
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-17
KC4UEB: <I never said I operated CB. Never even hinted that I use it. You however assume too much and wanted to simply write something nasty about someone so you just made up an incorrent statement, even if it was a lie.>
When someone describes CB in the detail that you have used, it is very apparent that you have spent your time on CB. I have learned a lot about CB from reading your posts. It sounds like a place I will definetely avoid. Thanks for the information.
<No one bothered to address the issue of the fact that HF is already FILLED with CB types, some of which are Extra class licensees. Nobody wanted to discuss the existing problem of foul language and trash talk on HF.>
I did address you on this and you did not bother to reply
<The best anyone could do was say that it doesn't happen using CW. My reply to that is the people who participate in the filthy language on the HF bands are the same people who operate CW. It just takes too much effort to tap out cuss words using CW, so they do it using a microphone instead. But many of these offenders are the SAME people who will lay that mic down only to drag their key out and start communicating with someone else using another mode. Just because someone doesn't cuss you out using CW doesn't mean these same foul-mouthed people are upstanding citizens. They just don't do it using CW. SO who cares they don't do it using CW. The fact remains they do it using phone, which is evidence enough they don't deserve the license they claim they worked so hard for.>
As I said before, this mess started when the FCC started slacking up on requirements. 75 meters (Not 80 meters) began having problems about the same time that the FCC stopped administering tests and started the VE Program. When the Code Waivers started, things got a lot worse. As the written tests dwindled down to 1st and 2nd grade level, things got even worse! Anyone that has been an active Ham long enough to watch this transpire and is Honest, will tell you the same thing. The testing now is about like the FAA giving a Blind Man his Pilots License.
<This whole issue is a moot point anyway because all the pissing and moaning about learning or not learning CW doesn't mean a damn thing because the rules will change soon enough and all you people who THINK your better than everyone else are HISTORY.>
Mistakes can be reversed, my friend. Where you get this "Better than everyone else" bull is beyond comprehension. CW may not mean a
xxxx thing to you, but the very foundation of Amateur Radio was built on it. The FCC decision makers are not Hams, and dont have a clue what kind of mess you people have brewed up. Noone thinks they are better than you, they just want you to become a genuine Ham, a complete Ham.
<And if you don't want to talk to those you feel are "less" of an operator than you, that's even better because we don't want to talk to you or even hear you on HF anyway.>
I never said I would not talk to anyone. Dont think for one second that you will run anyone off of HF buddy boy. I worked hard and tested before the FCC for my license, and will not throw it away for a bunch of Lazy People who want everything given to them,
CW, written tests, and all. I guess your next move will be No Test at All, fill out the form and get your license.
<Like I said earlier, the HF band is about to be improved upon two-fold. All the "I'm better than you" people are about to have their clocks cleaned by having CW wiped off the face of testing requirements, and apparently we won't have to listen to your bitching on HF because you've indicated you won't talk to *us* anyway. We win all the way around.>
The HF bands are very likely about to go to crap. I am sorry to inform you, but I will not be going away. The Real Hams will be on there trying to use the Chaotic Mess that the None Hams have created. Too bad you people will never know what you destroyed, but that was your choice. All we ever wanted was for you to join us, not try to destroy us.
<And to those who don't like where the hobby is heading: Don't let the door hit you on your way out.>
Like I said, buddy boy, you are not running a single Ham off, all you are doing is pooping in your own Mess Kit. As for the door, it is always open for you to become a real Ham !!
<Funny how the shoe is now on the other foot isn't it?>
I dont see anything funny about this whole mess. In the end, I am afraid the only foot will be the foot you have stuck in your own mouth!! There are no sides to this mess, only Right and Wrong !!!!!!
73, and I WILL see you on the air, like it or not.
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-17
KC4UEB: <I never said I operated CB. Never even hinted that I use it. You however assume too much and wanted to simply write something nasty about someone so you just made up an incorrent statement, even if it was a lie.>
When someone describes CB in the detail that you have used, it is very apparent that you have spent your time on CB. I have learned a lot about CB from reading your posts. It sounds like a place I will definetely avoid. Thanks for the information.
<No one bothered to address the issue of the fact that HF is already FILLED with CB types, some of which are Extra class licensees. Nobody wanted to discuss the existing problem of foul language and trash talk on HF.>
I did address you on this and you did not bother to reply
<The best anyone could do was say that it doesn't happen using CW. My reply to that is the people who participate in the filthy language on the HF bands are the same people who operate CW. It just takes too much effort to tap out cuss words using CW, so they do it using a microphone instead. But many of these offenders are the SAME people who will lay that mic down only to drag their key out and start communicating with someone else using another mode. Just because someone doesn't cuss you out using CW doesn't mean these same foul-mouthed people are upstanding citizens. They just don't do it using CW. SO who cares they don't do it using CW. The fact remains they do it using phone, which is evidence enough they don't deserve the license they claim they worked so hard for.>
As I said before, this mess started when the FCC started slacking up on requirements. 75 meters (Not 80 meters) began having problems about the same time that the FCC stopped administering tests and started the VE Program. When the Code Waivers started, things got a lot worse. As the written tests dwindled down to 1st and 2nd grade level, things got even worse! Anyone that has been an active Ham long enough to watch this transpire and is Honest, will tell you the same thing. The testing now is about like the FAA giving a Blind Man his Pilots License.
<This whole issue is a moot point anyway because all the pissing and moaning about learning or not learning CW doesn't mean a damn thing because the rules will change soon enough and all you people who THINK your better than everyone else are HISTORY.>
Mistakes can be reversed, my friend. Where you get this "Better than everyone else" bull is beyond comprehension. CW may not mean a
xxxx thing to you, but the very foundation of Amateur Radio was built on it. The FCC decision makers are not Hams, and dont have a clue what kind of mess you people have brewed up. Noone thinks they are better than you, they just want you to become a genuine Ham, a complete Ham.
<And if you don't want to talk to those you feel are "less" of an operator than you, that's even better because we don't want to talk to you or even hear you on HF anyway.>
I never said I would not talk to anyone. Dont think for one second that you will run anyone off of HF buddy boy. I worked hard and tested before the FCC for my license, and will not throw it away for a bunch of Lazy People who want everything given to them,
CW, written tests, and all. I guess your next move will be No Test at All, fill out the form and get your license.
<Like I said earlier, the HF band is about to be improved upon two-fold. All the "I'm better than you" people are about to have their clocks cleaned by having CW wiped off the face of testing requirements, and apparently we won't have to listen to your bitching on HF because you've indicated you won't talk to *us* anyway. We win all the way around.>
The HF bands are very likely about to go to crap. I am sorry to inform you, but I will not be going away. The Real Hams will be on there trying to use the Chaotic Mess that the None Hams have created. Too bad you people will never know what you destroyed, but that was your choice. All we ever wanted was for you to join us, not try to destroy us.
<And to those who don't like where the hobby is heading: Don't let the door hit you on your way out.>
Like I said, buddy boy, you are not running a single Ham off, all you are doing is pooping in your own Mess Kit. As for the door, it is always open for you to become a real Ham !!
<Funny how the shoe is now on the other foot isn't it?>
I dont see anything funny about this whole mess. In the end, I am afraid the only foot will be the foot you have stuck in your own mouth!! There are no sides to this mess, only Right and Wrong !!!!!!
73, and I WILL see you on the air, like it or not.
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-17
Code Elimination
I can't say that I ever felt "hazed" as a pre-ham or new ham with a Novice license. In no way was cw ever presented or perceived as any kind of gauntlet, hazing ritual, or writ of passage. It was simply a licensing requirement and I was more than happy to comply even though I had no interest in it. My disinterest wasn't active disinterest. I only knew that I wasn't interested in cw when I had my license in hand and an S-38 receiver and my homemade 6L6GTG crystal oscillator and could tune it up and light a low wattage lightbulb and still didn't feel drawn to get on the air. A few months later I got my Conditional license and quickly headed off to 20 meters to the phone band. I made lots of AM qso's with my low dipole antenna and perhaps 30 watts output. These often ended abruptly due to qrm and/or qsb. While relating that fact one day to another local, an older gentleman suggested that I try cw. I scoffed at the idea but he insisted and even offered to loan me a J-38 key. I took him up on the offer, got my old "handbook" out and read up on cw operating protocol and went to it. Suddenly I wasn't working just North/Central and South America. I was working Europe, Africa, Pacific, Asian and ever Antarctic dx. They were even answering my "cq's". I was hooked. I never made the trip back to phone operation in a big way and remain mostly a cw op. CW may be considered "obsolete" in the commercial sense, in public safety, maritime and even most military communications. The mission of all of these organizations is to move traffic in an efficient manner, quickly and accurately with the least skilled people possible in order to maximize the cost benefit ratio. We on the other hand are radio amateurs. We are not involved with radio for any other purpose than for love. We have no mission critical importance to most of our communications and no cost benefit ratio to consider. The bang for the buck invested in cw operation is unequaled with any other mode and cw is well suited to our typical style of communications. One very disappointing aspect of watching modernism sell the newer hams a bill of goods is observing the widespread mistaken belief that "new is better", "change for the sake of change, when driven by technology, is good". A new generation of hams seem to be marching to the mantra that the digital modes outperform cw. In some cases that is true, if you consider "throughput" to be one of the ways. For all of its touted virtue, PSK31 can't do it although it does approach the effectiveness of cw in some instances. No one believes that knowing code, in and of itself produces better hams. The real reason that there is a large rift in amateur radio over code is that it represents the only real effort left to put forth in pursuit of a license. We've all known for years that the written test was easily overcome by the fact that the exact wording of the questions and answers is in the public domain. Once upon a time that was called cheating. Now its considered "in the public interest" in order to further the social goal of making an amateur license available to anyone with even the slightest desire to obtain one. It reminds me of the joke about the Russian worker quoted as having said "they pretend to pay us so we pretend to work". One must wonder if a downgrading of standards in licensing amateurs wasn't also a ploy to siphon off the illegals around 27 mhz and make them legit as amateurs, as well as the above stated social goal. There is a law in money that "bad money drives out good". In 1964 the Fed. Govt. began withdrawing the silver backing from our paper money and silver content from our change. It quickly drove the silver out of circulation. The changes in standards in amateur radio will only further polarize the avocation. Its not a case of OF's deliberately shunning newcomers but that human nature will always tend to cause humans to gravitate towards others of like mind, interests, etc. General interest clubs, broadly based will lose members. If clubs rise in numbers, it will be because they become more narrowly defined and focused.
You want to know about hazing? Hazing is what happens ( or at least used to )on board US Naval ships when they approach and cross the Equator. King Neptune is welcomed aboard by the Captain of the ship and for anywhere from several hours to perhaps the best part of a day, the "shellbacks" initiate the "polywogs". I only ever knew one sailor who refused to submit to an initiation. From that point on he was known as a "bastard" shellback and was scorned and ridiculed by some members of the crew on that particular destroyer.
If your attitude is one of, "I want to be a ham but only if I can have it on my terms", then you should not expect a warm reception. Some of you have been very rabid in openly opposing cw. You can expect to be shunned by some, possibly even many. Those that come after the code elimination will find a reception in direct response to their attitudes.
For many of us there was no challenge that was legal, moral or ethical that we wouldn't have risen to to become licensed radio amateurs. How can you possibly believe that with an attitude of, "I want to be a radio amateur but only on my terms", that you are equal? You'll understand when the next wave of wannabe's want the last barrier removed, all testing. Then the ham ticket will have no remaining value and meaning.
It will be interesting watching events unfold from here on.
Posted by
WA4DOU on 2005-08-17
> As I said before, this mess started when
> the FCC started slacking up on
> requirements. 75 meters (Not 80 meters)
> began having problems about the same time
> that the FCC stopped administering tests
> and started the VE Program.
And this explains the old man complaining about problem behavior on HF before the FCC even existed?
No, the problem with LIDS did not start with dropping the code requirement, nor with the start of the VE program. It started, as far as I can tell, when the third guy on the air interrupted a QSO between the first two.
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-17
What happened to 75 Meters?
First of all, the complete quote please!
<As I said before, this mess started when the FCC started slacking up on requirements. 75 meters (Not 80 meters) began having problems about the same time that the FCC stopped administering tests and started the VE Program. When the Code Waivers started, things got a lot worse. As the written tests dwindled down to 1st <and 2nd grade level, things got even <worse! Anyone that has been an active Ham <long enough to watch this transpire and is Honest, will tell you the same thing. The testing now is about like the FAA giving a Blind Man his Pilots License.>
AE6IP, it sounds like you have not been a Ham long enough to have listened to 75 Meters before it went south. It was a great band even for a 12 year old kid like I was at the time. There was no cursing, racial slurs, or other misbehavior on the band. Yes, there was an occasional LID, as there has always been, but then they did not resort to profanity. This was in the 60s
and 70s.
The Question was asked, and the answer has been given. If you do not believe, just ask someone else who was there and watched the mess evolve thru the years!!
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-17
What happened to 75 Meters?
First of all, the complete quote please!
<As I said before, this mess started when the FCC started slacking up on requirements. 75 meters (Not 80 meters) began having problems about the same time that the FCC stopped administering tests and started the VE Program. When the Code Waivers started, things got a lot worse. As the written tests dwindled down to 1st <and 2nd grade level, things got even <worse! Anyone that has been an active Ham <long enough to watch this transpire and is Honest, will tell you the same thing. The testing now is about like the FAA giving a Blind Man his Pilots License.>
AE6IP, it sounds like you have not been a Ham long enough to have listened to 75 Meters before it went south. It was a great band even for a 12 year old kid like I was at the time. There was no cursing, racial slurs, or other misbehavior on the band. Yes, there was an occasional LID, as there has always been, but then they did not resort to profanity. This was in the 60s
and 70s.
The Question was asked, and the answer has been given. If you do not believe, just ask someone else who was there and watched the mess evolve thru the years!!
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-17
Code Elimination
I can't say that I ever felt "hazed" as a pre-ham or new ham with a Novice license. In no way was cw ever presented or perceived as any kind of gauntlet, hazing ritual, or writ of passage. It was simply a licensing requirement and I was more than happy to comply even though I had no interest in it. My disinterest wasn't active disinterest. I only knew that I wasn't interested in cw when I had my license in hand and an S-38 receiver and my homemade 6L6GTG crystal oscillator and could tune it up and light a low wattage lightbulb and still didn't feel drawn to get on the air. A few months later I got my Conditional license and quickly headed off to 20 meters to the phone band. I made lots of AM qso's with my low dipole antenna and perhaps 30 watts output. These often ended abruptly due to qrm and/or qsb. While relating that fact one day to another local, an older gentleman suggested that I try cw. I scoffed at the idea but he insisted and even offered to loan me a J-38 key. I took him up on the offer, got my old "handbook" out and read up on cw operating protocol and went to it. Suddenly I wasn't working just North/Central and South America. I was working Europe, Africa, Pacific, Asian and ever Antarctic dx. They were even answering my "cq's". I was hooked. I never made the trip back to phone operation in a big way and remain mostly a cw op. CW may be considered "obsolete" in the commercial sense, in public safety, maritime and even most military communications. The mission of all of these organizations is to move traffic in an efficient manner, quickly and accurately with the least skilled people possible in order to maximize the cost benefit ratio. We on the other hand are radio amateurs. We are not involved with radio for any other purpose than for love. We have no mission critical importance to most of our communications and no cost benefit ratio to consider. The bang for the buck invested in cw operation is unequaled with any other mode and cw is well suited to our typical style of communications. One very disappointing aspect of watching modernism sell the newer hams a bill of goods is observing the widespread mistaken belief that "new is better", "change for the sake of change, when driven by technology, is good". A new generation of hams seem to be marching to the mantra that the digital modes outperform cw. In some cases that is true, if you consider "throughput" to be one of the ways. For all of its touted virtue, PSK31 can't do it although it does approach the effectiveness of cw in some instances. No one believes that knowing code, in and of itself produces better hams. The real reason that there is a large rift in amateur radio over code is that it represents the only real effort left to put forth in pursuit of a license. We've all known for years that the written test was easily overcome by the fact that the exact wording of the questions and answers is in the public domain. Once upon a time that was called cheating. Now its considered "in the public interest" in order to further the social goal of making an amateur license available to anyone with even the slightest desire to obtain one. It reminds me of the joke about the Russian worker quoted as having said "they pretend to pay us so we pretend to work". One must wonder if a downgrading of standards in licensing amateurs wasn't also a ploy to siphon off the illegals around 27 mhz and make them legit as amateurs, as well as the above stated social goal. There is a law in money that "bad money drives out good". In 1964 the Fed. Govt. began withdrawing the silver backing from our paper money and silver content from our change. It quickly drove the silver out of circulation. The changes in standards in amateur radio will only further polarize the avocation. Its not a case of OF's deliberately shunning newcomers but that human nature will always tend to cause humans to gravitate towards others of like mind, interests, etc. General interest clubs, broadly based will lose members. If clubs rise in numbers, it will be because they become more narrowly defined and focused.
You want to know about hazing? Hazing is what happens ( or at least used to )on board US Naval ships when they approach and cross the Equator. King Neptune is welcomed aboard by the Captain of the ship and for anywhere from several hours to perhaps the best part of a day, the "shellbacks" initiate the "polywogs". I only ever knew one sailor who refused to submit to an initiation. From that point on he was known as a "bastard" shellback and was scorned and ridiculed by some members of the crew on that particular destroyer.
If your attitude is one of, "I want to be a ham but only if I can have it on my terms", then you should not expect a warm reception. Some of you have been very rabid in openly opposing cw. You can expect to be shunned by some, possibly even many. Those that come after the code elimination will find a reception in direct response to their attitudes.
For many of us there was no challenge that was legal, moral or ethical that we wouldn't have risen to to become licensed radio amateurs. How can you possibly believe that with an attitude of, "I want to be a radio amateur but only on my terms", that you are equal? You'll understand when the next wave of wannabe's want the last barrier removed, all testing. Then the ham ticket will have no remaining value and meaning.
It will be interesting watching events unfold from here on.
Posted by
WA4DOU on 2005-08-17
W5AU:
The fact remains there are a lot of potty-mouths on HF. And these are people that know and use CW frequently. So when I see comments anywhere stating how HF is going to turn out like CB the FACT of the matter is it's already that way and has been for a long time now.
As for you assuming I'm a CB'er, that's presumptuous on your part and it's apparent your simply attempting to make statements that you think will at least give the appearance of impropriety or look somewhat derogatory on my part. Whichever the case may be, it isn't working. You can think of me as a CB'er if you like, but the truth is we all have clear knowlege of many things in life that we don't actually participate in. If you wish to try and confuse the issue or create some misdirection here than go for it. But I saiy again, the FACT remains that HF already has a boatload of licensed operators who will cuss you out and tell you what they think about you because of your skin color. So don't think for a second that HF is filled with people that are upstanding people just because they had to learn CW to operate there. That is an outright LIE, and that's a FACT.
And if you did address this issue of why there are so many LIDS on HF then why do you stand behind the mindset that CW filters out these people, and learning CW makes you a higher class radio operator? Your topical defense indicates you too believe this to be true. All I'm saying is how can this be true when there are so many licensed amateur operators who currently know and use CW who are some of the biggest foule-mouthed people on the planet? More directly, how did CW make these people "better operators" when you can't even let your children listen to them? Apparently CW doesn't do diddly as far as making people better operators when I hear so much cussing going on in the HF band it puts channel 19 to shame.
But once again it doesn't really matter because soon CW will be eliminated from testing requirements anyway. And many have stated they wont talk to no-code HF operators or will even exit the hobby completely. I say "good riddens" to those people because just as they don't want to talk to people who didn't learn CW to get their license, we too don't want to talk to them because they think their better than everyone else. If your not one of those who has plans of not talking to those who aren't going to learn CW to get on HF that's fine too. I don't think people really care who YOU are going to talk to on HF. But the age-old attitude of CW making you a better operator is proven to be a lie with all the foul-mouthed CW educated folks already on HF.
And it IS funny how the shoe is on the other foot. It just isn't funny to YOU because your on the side where the "shoe" doesn't work to your advantage any longer by way of the high and mighty CW beliefs. So yeah, to those people it's not funny at all. But to those who have been hammered on all these years about not being good enough because they didn't care for CW, it's friggen hilarious.
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-17
Read WA4DOU's Excellent Post!
WA4DOU:
Thanks for spending the time to write such an eloquent post.
I noticed AE6IP couldn't wait long to begin tearing it down. Just watch out -- he'll soon begin a rabid personal attack when he finds you're sincere about your well-founded, personal stance based on a long-standing ham radio career.
It' too bad he doesn't have the same long history in ham radio that some of you do. If his experiences were similar to our own, he may -- really may -- feel differently about Morse code, skills and testing standards.
But alas, he will vehemently deny this... for he believes that any level of demonstrated skill discriminates, and is NOT needed for a ham ticket.
Posted by
NL7W on 2005-08-17
KC4UEB
I'm not going to address every bit of your incoherent rant--just the last paragraph. First, I want nothing to do with you or your "people". I don't operate phone. I intend to exercise my CW privileges everywhere Part 97 says I'm allowed to, which is any frequency on any band except 60m. The phone bands are going CW, dude. I would never think of selling any of my equipment. A bunch of anti-code PTT phone freaks are not going to drive me off the bands. I use a 250 Hz filter. All I will hear is what I need to hear. If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck and walks like a duck, it must be a duck. If it looks like a CB-er, acts like a CB-er and walks like a CB-er, it must be a CB-er. You are a die-hard CB-er. You have an obnoxious nasty attitude like a CB-er. You are a miserable disgrace to amateur radio. Those who claim that CW is no filter are correct. The CW test didn't keep you out.
No 73 to you. I don't consider you to be a ham.
UG
Posted by
URBANGORILLA on 2005-08-17
Good Luck Monkey-Man
URBANMONKEY:
You are not recognized as a licensed amateur radio operator here. You are yet another one of those who want to hide behind an anonymous name and spew forth bullcrap . . . pure bullcrap.
The only relevant issue here is that your precious CW will be eliminated from the test, period. Your pissed off about that and you just want to vent on anyone who doesn't share your exact views on the matter
But the only relevant point here is that CW has taken a serious backseat to the grand scheme of things. CW is no longer recognized as the viable mode many of you folks have crammed down the throats of others over the years.
Your extremely let down about that and that's understandable. But don't complain to us because you people had your chance to be decent human beings to the rest of the amateur community but instead you chose to be elitists who accused those who didn't share your enthusiasm for CW as being lazy and unworthy of HF operation.
Well, now the tide has turned and the FCC will be changing the rules, which has knocked you and many others off your imaginary pedestal, and all because you looked down on other amateur operators who didn't share your precise beliefs regarding CW.
And it is this "My People, Your People" attitude that will always keep us separated. Your reference to that further illustrates that you recognize the distinct grouping of these beliefs. I stated that others made the comment that they were going to sell their equipment when non-CW HF people started getting on the air. But it is many of those among the group that you believe in who are the one's saying they are going to sell out when all this happens. I suppose you can hang in there as long as you can but with the ultra-sour attitude like yours it likely won't be long before you too throw in teh towel. After all, you and those like you will no longer be at the top of your imaginary food chain. You will have been dethroned by the very people you looked down upon for many years. Some call them LIDS, some call them CB'ers. In the end you will have lost that wonderful status in amateur radio, even if it was only an imagined one.
Good luck to you URBANMONKEY.
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-17
KC4UEB
My goodness, another long-winded rant. Yada, yada, yada.
. .- - ... .... .. - ... - ..- .--. .. -.. .-.-.- ...-.-
UG
Posted by
URBANGORILLA on 2005-08-17
Dumb it Down for simpletons
You have to realize, by now, that all the debating on either side will do no good at all. This is a decision that is going to be made by a United States Government Entity. Do you really think the votes you have cast in the past few elections (on the federal levels) have been considered or better yet fairly calculated? Open your eyes and take a true inventory of what is going on around you. Stop letting "popular opinion" drive your thinking. Stop acting like "sheeple". Of course I am sure there is an element of people (Amateurs even) that are into all the "darker elements" of life and relish on the degridation of the world we live in. Hasn't history proved that every aspect of our priviledged lives we live here in the states that the government regulates goes to the dogs sooner or later. Dumb down the public school system... now we produce legions of idiots and "yes-men/women from our public schools. People who would rat out their own family to see the dramatic excitement of someone other than themselves being abused by their "leaders and public servants". Thanks goes to the beurocrats on all these points.
I have an Idea... Lets just eliminate Amateur Radio licensing and regulation all together. That will fix it for all the people who want more powerful GMRS radios or are tired of rediculous cell phone bills to remind their spouses to pick up milk at the store on the way home from work. After all isn't that what our lazy population drives all its desires upon these days... convenience and simplicity.
Keeping the code requirements is what I would like to see. But I know it is doomed as a "requirement". Matters not 1 hill of beans to me what is done with the matters at hand. I will stick to CW and when I die I will have my Keyer buried with me in my wrinkled dead hands. The government with it's give it all away attitude these days is one big fat sad joke. If it has the word federal in it; It's a satirical joke. Ethics are dead. Morals are dead. Now all that is left to do is watch the "followers" of the machine march into the meat grinder of oblivion... it's ok the walk will do you good & you seem to need the exercise by the shape that your posterior has taken.
GOOD DAY...
Posted by
N8NSN on 2005-08-16
Woops I forgot to mention somthing...
Just a little humor for us here to "lighten up"...
Amateur one,
"How do you distinguish a new licensee who has HF privs that came from VHF & UHF bands"?
Amateur two,
"I guess you just ask? I don't know"
Amateur one,
"No, he'll be the one "waiting for the beep" after you un-key."
hardy har har harrrrrr hi hi hi
Posted by
N8NSN on 2005-08-16
KC0TLW Said: "
My first reaction was "where is everybody"? HF has a lot less activity, especially the CW bands. Not much QRS for folks that can't beat the code at high speed (without computer assist)."
First HF is dead right now due to the Sunspot cycle, not because of a CW requirment....
Next, you say especially CW? I don't understand because on any given night I hear more CW QSO's the SSB QSO's. Take a scan and count them, you'll be shocked!
People say we need new blood, wasn't that the excuse used during round one of CW elimination? What happened to the NoCode Techs of years ago? During round one we really didn't get a lot of "Quality" new blood, but in my area we did get a lot of new CB'ers
George - KI4FIA
http://www.MilAirComms.com
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-16
KI4FIA said "People say we need new blood, wasn't that the excuse used during round one of CW elimination? What happened to the NoCode Techs of years ago? During round one we really didn't get a lot of "Quality" new blood, but in my area we did get a lot of new CB'ers"
I saw the same thing in my area too....many more CBers with their lingo and 10 codes on the local repeaters....lowering our standards will NOT bring in more QUALITY hams...it will just bring in more of the under-achievers who can't make the grade now....
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-16
Monkey's uncle
>Code Elimination
I believe it is absolute baloney that legions of engineers and technicians were locked out of amateur radio by the code test. I heard this attitude voiced occasionally over the years. It was just an excuse. The fact was that these types of individuals were not motivated to obtain amateur licenses and code was the scapegoat. What they were really saying was that becomming licensed wasn't important to them. Now the last significant effort to become licensed is being eliminated. The fraternity that once was is no more and the noteworthiness that was associated with being an amateur is mostly gone. There really is little that distinguishes amateur radio now from cb.
Posted by WA4DOU on August 15, 2005<
::Dead on. WA4DOU. Legions of achievers have not been locked out by the code test requirement. Actually, I doubt that one single person was. Surely nobody complained about the code test requirement from the "beginning" until 1979 -- more than sixty years of Federal licensing. It was just one of those things, like having to parallel park. I knew when my 9 year-old nephew Rob (now AJ6E), who has cerebral palsy and a few notable disabilities learned the code in one day, with my sending sports team names to him at 20 wpm, that if this is an obstacle for anybody, I'm a monkey's uncle.
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-16
Antennas needed
>KC0TLW wrote: Da Code Mode
I got back into ham radio after a long break, and got my ticket (back) in Nov. 2004.
My first reaction was "where is everybody"? HF has a lot less activity, especially the CW bands. Not much QRS for folks that can't beat the code at high speed (without computer assist).<
::Here's the problem: You don't understand. That's forgivable, since you just returned (welcome back). "Where's everybody?" Come visit my station, I'll let you hear where they are. We are at a sunspot cycle minimum right now, and will be for the next couple of years, and signals aren't as strong, and the higher bands aren't open, but there's tons of activity. I cannot find a clear frequency for a CQ, quite often, both on CW and SSB, on bands like 17m, 20m and 40m. It takes antennas, and good ones, to hear what's going on.
::And that's another problem: The prevalance of restrictive covenants (CC&Rs) has greatly impacted prospective hams' ability to erect worthwhile antennas, making exactly the problem you discuss ("Where's everybody?") much worse than it used to be. In the old days, almost any ham who was slightly serious about making contacts installed large, space-consuming antenna systems.
>Personally, though I'm not that fast, I enjoy CW, and like to promote it. I run an informal morse code practice group on a local repeater, to HELP the newer hams, instead of excluding them.<
::That's wonderful! However, *listening* to code as "practice" isn't terribly effective, which is why so many interested folks couldn't get, lost interest, went away. What does work is interactive practice, where you send to them, then *they send back to you,* and you start having little "QSOs" right away, as soon as the students know three or four letters. And boy, does that work. "Listening" rarely worked well for anybody.
>The code test needs to go, and folks that WANT to use it still can. Having it as a choice instead of a requirement will add to the hobby, we need "new blood".<
::It will be interesting to see if this change brings in any new blood, and what kind of blood they have.
>Promote CW as a fun and inexpensive way to get into ham radio.<
::I always have. But code isn't a mode. CW's a mode. Code's a language. But you're surely on the right track with this last statement.
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-16
Da Code Mode
I got back into ham radio after a long break, and got my ticket (back) in Nov. 2004.
My first reaction was "where is everybody"? HF has a lot less activity, especially the CW bands. Not much QRS for folks that can't beat the code at high speed (without computer assist).
Could not believe the bad attitudes I heard about "No Codes". Lotsa whining, no helping.
Personally, though I'm not that fast, I enjoy CW, and like to promote it. I run an informal morse code practice group on a local repeater, to HELP the newer hams, instead of excluding them.
The code test needs to go, and folks that WANT to use it still can. Having it as a choice instead of a requirement will add to the hobby, we need "new blood".
Stop grumping about the newbies, and HELP them! I have fond memories of the Elmers that used to help me years ago, and honor their memory be being helpful with new folks.
Dropping the code will help bring more folks into the hobby, and that's a good thing.
CW will not go away if the test does. Low cost CW radio kits (like Oak Hills Research) are still available. Promote CW as a fun and inexpensive way to get into ham radio.
73... KC0TLW, ex WB0CYU
Posted by
W0TKX on 2005-08-16
Never mind
Well I gave my opinion, and got grumps telling me off and correcting me... If that was NOT your intention, it came off that way. Comes off as arrogance.
My post was a bit of an experiment, and I got the expected results. Why do so many hams act so ruthlessly "corrective"? Typical of many hams that compete needlessly about knowledge etc.
This arrogance is why groups like Hamsexy exist. This bad attitude is a huge problem.. it's not very welcoming or polite.
I know CW is a mode, not code. Sorry, I should have been more careful (here). Very aware of the sunspot minimum, spent time on 80/75 and 160 last winter and that was fun.
Whatever. Back on the air, having fun. Choosing who (whom) I talk to. Don't worry, I won't bother posting much here anymore.
I have sent in my comments to the FCC, quite a while ago.
Posted by
W0TKX on 2005-08-16
Code
I wrote this on May 1, 2003 , the topic was "Why are most new hams inactive?"
It still seems timely!
Before we start a dialog on this subject, is this a faulty premise? Where has it been demonstrated that new hams are inactive and especially "most" new hams?
And what, pray tell, does cellular telephone, FRS, CB radio, computers or the Internet got to do with amateur radio? To the extent these "activities" syphon off activity, I submit to you that the person involved has become a ham largely for reasons that will not sustain activity as a ham. This was all quite predictable when ,about 25 or so years ago, we began seeing a serious mania displayed to "recruit" new hams. The "hardcore" of amateur radio was always made up of individuals who found and were drawn to amateur radio on their own. They found it via the "magic" of broadcast band radio and short wave radio and they were enamored by the magic of the distances covered by wireless means. They were motivated by something inside themselves. Many found their way on their own mostly because they were internally motivated. Those types didn't need "recruiting". 30 or more years ago, who ever heard of new hams afraid of making their first qso, phone or cw? Who ever heard of hams back then who had the attitude that antennas were ugly and should be hidden? Only the truly unambitious and unmotivated would allow cw to stand in their path to a license. Have any of you ever heard of Cliff Corne K9EAB? Cliff was in an iron lung and could only wiggle a toe(if I remember the story correctly, as I heard it)but was known to be a competent cw enthusiast. Hows that for motivation? The fact is, for many of us they couldn't have erected barriers high enough to keep us out of ham radio and today they can't seem to lower them enough to suit some. If amateur radio itself, on its own merit and virtue, can't hold the interest of some, I don't give a hoot.And if you're among those to whom amateur radio put a deep hook in you, welcome to a lifetime of fascination
Posted by
WA4DOU on 2005-08-16
<<"Dropping the code will help bring more folks into the hobby, and that's a good thing.">>
One of the biggest falacies spewed by the anti-code folks.
Personally, we don't need and I don't want anybody in this hobby who isn't interested in working for their privi's. Quality over quantity, ALWAYS.
Posted by
AC0H on 2005-08-16
<<"Dropping the code will help bring more folks into the hobby, and that's a good thing.">>
One of the biggest falacies spewed by the anti-code folks.
Personally, we don't need and I don't want anybody in this hobby who isn't interested in working for their privi's. Quality over quantity, ALWAYS.
Posted by
AC0H on 2005-08-16
Deception Works!
<<"Dropping the code will help bring more folks into the hobby, and that's a good thing.">>
There have never been more Hams then there are today! As in politics, misinformation works well in our service. So many people have bought in to the notion that our numbers are way down when that is not the case! AC0H is correct,I have heard all of the "excuses"..I can't learn Morse....I am tonedeff...I am too old. The only excuse I accept is I won't learn Morse! There is merit in honesty.
Posted by
W8VOM on 2005-08-16
Code
Eliminating code will not create a rush of people to get a license. It has been possible to get a license without knowing code for sometime. So why should we expect more to act now. I don't think there will be a significant rush to upgrade. Now instead of being tone deaf or too old, there won't be the time to study for the written test or "I too old." As for recruitment, I wasn't recruited one morning while shopping at Radio Shack, my son and I thought "Hey lets get a Ham license" and we did. Somehow we stumbled upon a local radio club and joined. Joined the ARRL on our own without an invitation. Hey if its something you want to do you do it. We both upgraded and then upgraded again. Its been fun. Code is a challenge. I've only made two contacts but I'm getting more confident and keep practicing. But one has to ponder how many people on HF have never made a CW contact or ever used code after passing the test. I guess this scenario will be more prevelent among those who passed the 5wpm, like I did, than those who earned upgrades by passing 13wpm or 20wpm exams. I don't think code necessarily defines amateur radio but it comes closer than any other single thing.
Edwin, KC8YLD
Posted by
KC8YLD on 2005-08-16
Code
Eliminating code will not create a rush of people to get a license. It has been possible to get a license without knowing code for sometime. So why should we expect more to act now. I don't think there will be a significant rush to upgrade. Now instead of being tone deaf or too old, there won't be the time to study for the written test or "I too old." As for recruitment, I wasn't recruited one morning while shopping at Radio Shack, my son and I thought "Hey lets get a Ham license" and we did. Somehow we stumbled upon a local radio club and joined. Joined the ARRL on our own without an invitation. Hey if its something you want to do you do it. We both upgraded and then upgraded again. Its been fun. Code is a challenge. I've only made two contacts but I'm getting more confident and keep practicing. But one has to ponder how many people on HF have never made a CW contact or ever used code after passing the test. I guess this scenario will be more prevelent among those who passed the 5wpm, like I did, than those who earned upgrades by passing 13wpm or 20wpm exams. I don't think code necessarily defines amateur radio but it comes closer than any other single thing.
Edwin, KC8YLD
Posted by
KC8YLD on 2005-08-16
A Load of CRAP
So the CB'rs came to the repeaters with 10 codes? What about all the big-time folks who know CW who cuss and rant like they were on channel 19? I see all this talk about how HF is gonna turn into CB when CW testing is eliminated. I've got news for those who are saying this: It turned into that a long, long time ago. But you already knew that. You simply wanted something to moan and groan about. But even if you didn't realize it, what about the fact that you have extra class licensees making racial, sexual and otherwise off-color remarks in the HF band? What about all those big-time operators who learned CW who cuss you out? And you find it on HF ANY DAY OF THE WEEK. And it didn't just recently appear either. It's been that way for YEARS. So what about that? Why is there all this talk about how things are gonna be like CB when it's been that way for a long time now?
The bottom line is those who learned and currently use CW are no better than anyone else, and the time has come where they no longer are recognized for knowing CW because the rest of the world realizes they can't even let their own children listen to certain areas of the amateur HF band because the language is so filthy.
And how will HF be any different from CB when it's that way already?
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-16
KC4UEB said "And how will HF be any different from CB when it's that way already? "
It will have ALOT more folks with SOUR attitudes like yours....and that's not something I look forward to hearing on the bands...
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-16
<<"The bottom line is those who learned and currently use CW are no better than anyone else, and the time has come where they no longer are recognized for knowing CW because the rest of the world realizes they can't even let their own children listen to certain areas of the amateur HF band because the language is so filthy.">>
May be so in the SSB portions of the bands but not the CW portions.
By your logic adding even more relatively un-trained, inexperienced, un-motivated operators to the HF bands will make things better? Better for who Ham Radio or the Ham Radio manufacturers?
The foul language and shenanigans that go on on SSB are more a result of the FCC not doing it's enforcement job than by your assumption that ALL of the trouble makers are Extra's. I know of no Extra or HF privied Ham whose spent anytime actually doing CW who acts like you describe.
Posted by
AC0H on 2005-08-16
keep it for extra
keep it for extra...
Posted by
KT3K on 2005-08-16
Getting the Job Done
Electricity 101
An elderly lady phoned her telephone company to report that her telephone
failed to ring when her friends called - and that on the few occasions when it
did ring, her pet dog always moaned right before the phone rang. The
telephone repairman proceeded to the scene, curious to see this psychic dog or
senile elderly lady. He climbed a nearby telephone pole, hooked in his test
set, and dialed the subscriber's house. The phone didn't ring right away, but
then the
dog moaned loudly and the telephone began to ring.
Climbing down from the pole, the telephone repairman found:
1. The dog was tied to the telephone system's ground wire via a steel chain
and collar.
2. The wire connection to the ground rod was loose.
3. The dog was receiving 90 volts of signaling current when the phone number
was! called.
4. After a couple of such jolts, the dog would start moaning and then urinate
on himself and the ground. The wet ground would complete the circuit, thus
causing the phone to ring.
Which demonstrates that some problems CAN be fixed by pissing and moaning.
Pissing and Moaning also seems to work with the FCC.
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-16
Go Back
KC4UEB said "And how will HF be any different from CB when it's that way already? "
UEB, why dont you go back to your beloved CB Band ??
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-16
...
If the CW requirement is to stay, it's going to take a hell of alot more than a couple thousand hams out of the over 600,000 total ham population.
Posted by
K8NWX on 2005-08-16
Oldfart13 cant read
If you bought a new pair of glasses you would have read that I already have general ... took all of 2 weeks to get the code down. What a waste of time.
Oldfart, you are the wind between my cheeks.
Posted by
BIRDMAN on 2005-08-16
CW: On the way out
W5AU: I never said I operated CB. Never even hinted that I use it. You however assume too much and wanted to simply write something nasty about someone so you just made up an incorrent statement, even if it was a lie.
No one bothered to address the issue of the fact that HF is already FILLED with CB types, some of which are Extra class licensees. Nobody wanted to discuss the existing problem of foul language and trash talk on HF.
The best anyone could do was say that it doesn't happen using CW. My reply to that is the people who participate in the filthy language on the HF bands are the same people who operate CW. It just takes too much effort to tap out cuss words using CW, so they do it using a microphone instead. But many of these offenders are the SAME people who will lay that mic down only to drag their key out and start communicating with someone else using another mode. Just because someone doesn't cuss you out using CW doesn't mean these same foul-mouthed people are upstanding citizens. They just don't do it using CW. SO who cares they don't do it using CW. The fact remains they do it using phone, which is evidence enough they don't deserve the license they claim they worked so hard for.
This whole issue is a moot point anyway because all the pissing and moaning about learning or not learning CW doesn't mean a damn thing because the rules will change soon enough and all you people who THINK your better than everyone else are HISTORY.
And if you don't want to talk to those you feel are "less" of an operator than you, that's even better because we don't want to talk to you or even hear you on HF anyway.
Like I said earlier, the HF band is about to be improved upon two-fold. All the "I'm better than you" people are about to have their clocks cleaned by having CW wiped off the face of testing requirements, and apparently we won't have to listen to your bitching on HF because you've indicated you won't talk to *us* anyway. We win all the way around.
And to those who don't like where the hobby is heading: Don't let the door hit you on your way out.
Funny how the shoe is now on the other foot isn't it?
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-16
Radio Bigots
Someone coined the term "Radio Bigotry" some time ago. This was in response to the validity of CW and how some, not all but some, people who operate CW are radio bigots. They feel their better than other operators who don't care for CW.
Just to clarify though, not all CW enthusiasts feel this way. Not all CW enthusiasts think their better than everyone else who don't share the love of their favored mode. But there are a select group that think their Sh** don't stink just because they learned CW. And it's THOSE people (and I use the term "people" loosely) I'm addressing.
But once again the whole issue will soon be a moot point because CW will be eliminated from testing requirements and we'll be rid of those who feel they're so much better than everyone else for knowing CW.
CW is an important part of amateur radio though. It does have a long history, and many operators enjoy using this fine mode of operation. I for one hope CW is always present in amateur radio. It's just the people who think their better than everyone else who sour the whole issue.
Most CW operators are just regular people. They're nice and cordial. Then there's the *people* who go over the top with their sour attitudes towards other human beings just because some people don't share their love of this simple mode. They have all sorts of cute slogans to elevate themselves above other human beings, and they make up all kinds of kindergarten style situations as to why CW is so much better than anyone else's favored mode. The it becomes apparent to anyone with half a brain just how infantile these Radio Bigots are.
CW is nearly history in terms of licensing requirements. People can bitch all they want to about it, or you can embrace teh change and make the hobby better than it ever was.
Many people feel amateur radio will bottom out with the loss of CW testing. However, there are many who feel things will be improving with this change and it's up to those who don't have this "I'm better than you" attitude to continue to allow people to excel in their own way within their own talents in this hobby without allowing all the radio bigots to kill a good hobby for everyone else.
Talk about a bunch of babies trying to kill it for everyone just because they didn't get their way with things. For many years people had to put up with these same people cutting people down because they didn't like CW. Now the shoe is clearly on the other foot, and the radio bigots don't like it one bit because they've totally lost the control they once had over everyone else.
That *control* is about to be h i s t o r y.
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-16
HUMAN CURIOSITY
I believe that dropping the CW test will increase the number of CW operators. If the code test is dropped than that means more operators will get on HF. Once they hear CW, human curiosity will get the best of them and this might encourage them to learn CW. If the numbers do not increase they will certainly not decrease as rapidly as some suspect.
This is the opinion of a 15 year old Technician class amateur. FLAME IT IF YOU LIKE.
73 KD5ZER
Posted by
KD5ZER on 2005-08-16
Does it create more CW users
I learnt CW. Passed the test at 12wpm. Never touched a paddle or straight key afterwards for years. Worked only in SSB. So does the CW test makes new CW users? Not me.
Only recently I picked it up again. Not because have to, but because I want to. It really is different.
Look at it from another way: CW is a mode, but there are no exams for SSB, SSTV, DigiModes, ATV, ... which are also modes. What makes this one different?
Posted by
ON4CKM on 2005-08-15
Six Meters
Steve WB2WIK
//Sporadic-E often includes rapid QSB where signals can fade 50 dB inside a few seconds. They might come back, or they might not. To enjoy the band and the mode, and the propagation, requires some knowledge about how it works and the majority of six meter operators lack it. I answer somebody with "WB2WIK 59 Los Angeles, DM04, name is Steve, over," and they come back with their life story, only the first eleven syllables of which I'll ever hear because the band just faded. Not to mention that most don't get my callsign on the first try, and some not on the second or third try, either, despite my years of training in diction and annunciation to be a paid professional in the field.
Nincompoops.//
Some time I think the only thing that saves us from long winded people are the repeater time outs. I was talking to a station on 21.412, and after we exchanged call signs, he went on for 30 minutes straight. So it does not only happen on six meters...lol
We all know what the cause of this is. When a new ham gets a license, instead of teaching him to operate the radio with in the privilages they already have, new hams are often pressured into upgrading. I talk to hams in my home area that disregard six meters as a useful band. Also Six meters is not a lazy band like 2 meters is. You have to put some effort into your station to talk on it and be heard.
Maybe the problem is not the code itself, but the type of elmering that is given.
Phineas
K0KMA/Asia
Posted by
PHINEAS on 2005-08-15
CW and Outer Space
For about 100 years, CW signals have been traveling through outer space and being received by aliens on far and distant planets. These aliens have been able to decode these strange Dits and Dahs into intelligent messages. Because of the great distances in outer space, their messages to us in CW will soon be picked up by ham radio operators all over the world. This is why we need a pool of ham radio operators that are capable of receiving CW messages from the aliens and convey these messages to the general public.
Even with this historical event that is about to happen soon, I applaud the FCC for taking the steps to eliminate the telegraphy testing requirement. This does not mean the death of CW, just a test requirement.
Posted by
KF4TQV on 2005-08-15
Code just another mode
For a large group of technically-minded people, I don't understand all of our sentimentality towards Morse code. It's just another mode, and it will survive because it has it's enthusiasts. People who like it will continue to do it. And the more people we get into our hobby, the greater the odds that more people will experiment with code and like it.
To cite a more recent example, I'm sure not everyone is thrilled with PSK, but it has its enthusiasts and it will continue. But I don't see the FCC making PSK a requirement for a license any time soon.
Posted by
N1IWJ on 2005-08-15
If they learned to spell, though...
>AE6IP wrote: Someone needs to explain the great depression to Bill O'Reilly. The one in the thirties first and then the one that's coming.
If he ever understands that, then, maybe, he'll be able to figure out why the myth of hard work always leading to success is a myth.
If he doesn't get that, I'll be happy to introduce him to a lot of hard working, well educated americans who never managed to succede even in the boom periods. You can find them in every industry.
Posted by AE6IP on August 14, 2005<
::If they're well educated, I'd think they'd know how to spell succeed. But Bill O'Reilly didn't stipulate the formula for success, anyway: Only the one for failure, one of the larger ingredients for which is most assuredly entitlements.
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-15
no code
Lets get rid of the code and while we're at it, get rid of the rest of the exam too. Just pay the FCC a license fee and get a callsign. Most ops are appliance operators anyway and couldn't care less what a diode does much less anything else technical.
Keep the code. It is the only thing that separates us from the CB band.
Posted by
KF9LI on 2005-08-15
no code
Lets get rid of the code and while we're at it, get rid of the rest of the exam too. Just pay the FCC a license fee and get a callsign. Most ops are appliance operators anyway and couldn't care less what a diode does much less anything else technical.
Keep the code. It is the only thing that separates us from the CB band.
Posted by
KF9LI on 2005-08-15
WB2WIK said "If they're well educated, I'd think they'd know how to spell succeed. But Bill O'Reilly didn't stipulate the formula for success, anyway: Only the one for failure, one of the larger ingredients for which is most assuredly entitlements."
I guess we probably need to cut Marty some slack...he's only been licensed about two years....so he's a newbie at this ham radio thing...LOL...The point you make is valid, entitlements ARE one of the main ingredients of failure, and this applies to ham radio just as sure as it applies to the real world...
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-15
Code is a mode?
>N1IWJ wrote: Code just another mode
For a large group of technically-minded people, I don't understand all of our sentimentality towards Morse code. It's just another mode, and it will survive because it has it's enthusiasts. People who like it will continue to do it. And the more people we get into our hobby, the greater the odds that more people will experiment with code and like it.
To cite a more recent example, I'm sure not everyone is thrilled with PSK, but it has its enthusiasts and it will continue. But I don't see the FCC making PSK a requirement for a license any time soon.
Posted by N1IWJ on August 15, 2005<
::I guess you haven't been following this very closely. Code is not, nor never was, a "mode." CW is a mode, that happens to use code. Code isn't the mode, it's a language.
::Also, there already is testing for PSK31 and other digital modes, in the question pool. In fact, the pool includes quite a lot of questions about these modes, relating to bandwidth occupied, frequency allocations and so forth. It's true an actual *demonstration* of use would be better than simply coughing up memorized answers to questions, and I'd be all for that. So would most of us.
WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-15
CW is a mode
WB2WIK/6 wrote:
::I guess you haven't been following this very closely. Code is not, nor never was, a "mode." CW is a mode, that happens to use code. Code isn't the mode, it's a language.
Posted by WB2WIK on August 15, 2005
I misspoke, or mistyped in this case. Thank you for your "kind" correction. Shame on me for mixing up the words "code" and "CW."
That aside, I HAVE been following this closely and long for the day that CW is no longer required. Then I hope to delve into this hobby more.
Your quick assumption that I haven't been following this topic, and condescending tone are typical of what I encountered from many hams when I first got my license in 1991.
And no, I've never owned a CB. I'm middle-aged, have a college degree, a good job and would be eager to explore this hobby further -- without knowing the code. If I'm the kind of person everyone is trying to keep out of amateur radio, then so be it.
Posted by
N1IWJ on 2005-08-15
The Lighter Side :)
Maybe KF4TQV has a point ! :)
Maybe SETI should be looking for less 'Sophisticated ' modes ? :O
Posted by
G3SEA on 2005-08-15
N1IWJ said "If I'm the kind of person everyone is trying to keep out of amateur radio, then so be it."
It has nothing to do with you personally.......but it has everything to do with your ATTITUDE toward amateur radio....the ATTITUDE that thinks that somehow you deserve something without having to WORK for it....I'm sure you are a very intellegent person, and I'm sure they didn't GIVE you the college degree because you complained that the exams were too hard..did they ??? The same thing applies here....learn the code, pass the test, and THEN enjoy what you have EARNED...
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-15
My comments to the FCC RE: 05-235
Dear FCC Members,
As a kid, I would lie awake at night and listen to the dits and dahs on the airwaves of my grandmother's short-wave radio. It wasn't until I was in my late 20's that I first studied to earn my amateur radio service license. At that time, I was newly married and didn't want to take the time to learn morse code (which was still a requirement).
Finally, I buckled down and studied the Technician License book last year -- and proudly recevied my first callsign, KI4GPX, one year ago this past week. I have since changed to a "vanity" callsign - W4TCJ.
As a new amateur operator, I am excited about ALL of the modes, services and rewards of ham radio -- especially community service. Although I don't personally want to be forced to learn morse code in order to use certain frequencies, I realize that Morse Code (CW) is important.
In my opinion, Morse code is one "hurdle" to keep the amateur radio service from turning in to the citizens' band. In other words, if YOU (the FCC) don't provide some reason for amateur radio to be special (something to reach for), it will most certainly spiral down into the cursing, mean-spirited and almost useless world that encompasses CB.
However, Morse Code may NOT be the only answer. I wholeheartedly support removing the question pool from the public arena. I also support having the Technician, General and Extra class exams include more questions on a variety of topics.
In either event, Morse Code is VERY important to the amateur radio service and should be given a place of prominence. My own submission would be to leave the amateur licensing classes as they are: Technician, General and Extra. Allow Tech & General to go no-code, but retain the code requirement for Extra. Remove the question pool from the public view. Then, allow those who have/pass their General license exam to obtain a code endorsement by testing (5WPM/13WPM/20WPM). Give these "General-Code Endorsed" licensees a small portion of the band where Technicians cannot operate. In fact, give anyone with Code proficiency (General-Code Endorsed & Extra) a portion of the band where NO ONE else can operate on any mode. These areas could be EASILY incorporated into the existing spectrum. Then, the small areas that will not longer be relevant can be given to digital communications among licensed amateurs.
I don't think one needs to know Morse Code to be a good amateur operator. However, I don't think the amateur service will be good without CW operators.
Please file my comments, along with the rest, regarding Proceeding #05-235. THANK YOU for your consideration.
Regards,
Charlie Jarman, W4TCJ
Posted by
KI4GPX on 2005-08-15
Code, mode, schmode...
>CW is a mode
WB2WIK/6 wrote:
::I guess you haven't been following this very closely. Code is not, nor never was, a "mode." CW is a mode, that happens to use code. Code isn't the mode, it's a language.
Posted by WB2WIK on August 15, 2005
I misspoke, or mistyped in this case. Thank you for your "kind" correction. Shame on me for mixing up the words "code" and "CW."
That aside, I HAVE been following this closely and long for the day that CW is no longer required. Then I hope to delve into this hobby more.
Your quick assumption that I haven't been following this topic, and condescending tone are typical of what I encountered from many hams when I first got my license in 1991.
And no, I've never owned a CB. I'm middle-aged, have a college degree, a good job and would be eager to explore this hobby further -- without knowing the code. If I'm the kind of person everyone is trying to keep out of amateur radio, then so be it.
Posted by N1IWJ on August 15, 2005<
::Nah. I wasn't being condescending. Just correcting a very common (it's not only you, it's a lot of folks) misconception that somehow "code" is a "mode." It's not, any more than "speaking" is a "mode." It's not, either.
::And an amateur radio license isn't an entitlement. That's the core issue. Some people would like it to be, and reducing the difficulty for licensing, whether by eliminating the code test or any other means, brings it closer to an entitlement. That has already proven to be a problem. For about eighty years, hams took tests including code tests, and nobody ever complained it was too hard or it should be made easier. People either buckled up and passed the tests, or they didn't.
::The proposal to eliminate the code test, along with very relaxed written exams having entire question and answer pools published, so my computer could pass the test by itself without any help from me, has proven to be a problem. Listen to the ham bands today, and if you can compare this to how they sounded in 1979 or earlier, you'll recognize what the problem is. Some of us are eager to not repeat past mistakes. That's about all.
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-15
Best of the Best
Why do Marines need boot camp?
Why do hams need to know code?
Simply to be the best. (at least for Extra class anyway)
Extra does mean Extra....Right?
Posted by
W9SN on 2005-08-15
CW is gone from testing, like it or not
I guess it doesn't matter what side of the "issue" you're on now because CW testing is going to be eliminated like it or not. Talking about it here won't change that fact that it's history soon.
There are those who have stated they won't talk to those who get their license under the soon-to-be changed rules. I guess the bands will either be a lot quieter or they'll bustle with even more activity than they do now, as there will be a whole new group of people on the bands using their new radio equipment. And they'll all be very happy to talk to those who don't have the snooty attitude that your nothing if you didn't learn CW to get on HF.
Yes, there will be PLENTY of people to talk to on HF. The only thing we'll be rid of is all those who think their so much better than everyone else because of CW.
HF is about to be improved twice-over.
Posted by
KC4UEB on 2005-08-15
Code, etc.
>N1IWJ: If I'm the kind of person everyone is trying to keep out of amateur radio, then so be it.
I thought your remarks were well reasoned and not disrespectful to anyone. You most certainly are the kind of individual I'd enjoy hearing on the HF bands.
Not all of us old farts are in a tizzy over the code test going away. It was initially difficult for me to pick a pro or no position during the last 4 or 5 years of not-so-gentlemanly debate. It happens that I enjoy Morse Code and it accounts for 75 percent of all my time on the air since 1962.
But also over the years I have known, and still know, folks who tried to learn it, only to experience frustration and discouragement. If we were still stuck in the time that code proficiency for HF operating was mandated by international radio regulations, I'd say too bad, sorry it's not going to work out for you. But legality is not the issue anymore. I don't think amateur radio needs hazing rituals and I don't consider code testing as evidence of the stuff quality folks are made of.
I also know individuals who cannot possibly be "upgraded" by the ham radio licensing structure since they are already engineers and accomplished professionals in technology and RF communications. It's amateur radio's loss when good people of all backgrounds choose not to include our hobby in their lives because they find the code irrelevant and not worthy of their time. Although I think removing the code test will make the hobby more appealing to some, I expect those will be small numbers. It could take decades to shake the image that you have to be a telegrapher to be an amateur radio operator.
I think the greatest promise and most positive effect will be better deployment of the human resources we already have. I welcome a redistribution of existing amateurs across all of our bands and hope we see a lot of new General and Extra licenses. Hopefully they will bring newfound enthusiasm and help raise activity levels to ward off future speculation over whether we are using our spectrum efficiently. That, incidentally, was a message subtly conveyed by FCC in their recent NPRM.
73 Mike
Posted by
W8CVE on 2005-08-15
>There are those who have stated they won't talk to those who get their license under the soon-to-be changed rules. I guess the bands will either be a lot quieter or they'll bustle with even more activity than they do now, as there will be a whole new group of people on the bands using their new radio equipment. And they'll all be very happy to talk to those who don't have the snooty attitude that your nothing if you didn't learn CW to get on HF.
Yes, there will be PLENTY of people to talk to on HF. The only thing we'll be rid of is all those who think their so much better than everyone else because of CW.
HF is about to be improved twice-over.
Posted by KC4UEB on August 15, 2005<
::We'll be listening for you there, UEB. Don't forget to erect a tower and beam for HF so we'll hear you. -WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-15
Code Elimination
I believe it is absolute baloney that legions of engineers and technicians were locked out of amateur radio by the code test. I heard this attitude voiced occasionally over the years. It was just an excuse. The fact was that these types of individuals were not motivated to obtain amateur licenses and code was the scapegoat. What they were really saying was that becomming licensed wasn't important to them. Now the last significant effort to become licensed is being eliminated. The fraternity that once was is no more and the noteworthiness that was associated with being an amateur is mostly gone. There really is little that distinguishes amateur radio now from cb.
Posted by
WA4DOU on 2005-08-15
Code Elimination
I believe it is absolute baloney that legions of engineers and technicians were locked out of amateur radio by the code test. I heard this attitude voiced occasionally over the years. It was just an excuse. The fact was that these types of individuals were not motivated to obtain amateur licenses and code was the scapegoat. What they were really saying was that becomming licensed wasn't important to them. Now the last significant effort to become licensed is being eliminated. The fraternity that once was is no more and the noteworthiness that was associated with being an amateur is mostly gone. There really is little that distinguishes amateur radio now from cb.
Posted by
WA4DOU on 2005-08-15
Same ole - same ole!
I personaly would like the code requirement to remain. (its my mode) However, those that cry that same old tune that without it the ham bands will be just like CB are not playing with a full deck. The last time I turned on a CB radio it was pretty quite, and I'm in the Philly burbs. Even if that weren't the case, if thats the best argument you people can come up with for retaining CW you've got several serious thinking problems, and probably support that moron we have for a president.
Posted by
LEFTY on 2005-08-15
Da Code Mode
I got back into ham radio after a long break, and got my ticket (back) in Nov. 2004.
My first reaction was "where is everybody"? HF has a lot less activity, especially the CW bands. Not much QRS for folks that can't beat the code at high speed (without computer assist).
Could not believe the bad attitudes I heard about "No Codes". Lotsa whining, no helping.
Personally, though I'm not that fast, I enjoy CW, and like to promote it. I run an informal morse code practice group on a local repeater, to HELP the newer hams, instead of excluding them.
The code test needs to go, and folks that WANT to use it still can. Having it as a choice instead of a requirement will add to the hobby, we need "new blood".
Stop grumping about the newbies, and HELP them! I have fond memories of the Elmers that used to help me years ago, and honor their memory be being helpful with new folks.
Dropping the code will help bring more folks into the hobby, and that's a good thing.
CW will not go away if the test does. Low cost CW radio kits (like Oak Hills Research) are still available. Promote CW as a fun and inexpensive way to get into ham radio.
73... KC0TLW, ex WB0CYU
Posted by
W0TKX on 2005-08-15
Scammers Went NoCode Long Ago
NoCode is nothing new.
I know of a ham that got a medical doctor to sign the code waiver on his General exam about six years ago. The ham faked that he was dyslexic and was "incapable" of learning Morse.
He drove 140 miles to a testing center in a different city, electing not to be exposed locally.
He was easily granted "credit" for the code, just using a Doctors Excuse.
He and (I'm sure) hundreds of others got licensed this way. These scammers are the original "no code" Generals.
So, lets get real on this code issue. NoCode is nothing new, it's been going on for years!
Posted by
WPE9JRL on 2005-08-14
Ignorant Ass
R.E. The scatological post K1MANN made on August 13, 2005 - GROW UP!
Dennis KG4RUL
Posted by
KG4RUL on 2005-08-14
The split in the ranks.
Ref W5AU: Well in a round about way you really did hit the nail on the head. We can all make believe that its not really there but it is and will always be. I don't agree either with the comment that some of the smartest folks in radio are running around in the tech ranks. I know plenty of smart old farts as we're referred to that are still on the cutting edge, thats just more code nocode crap PERIOD. I honestly really don't think after the smoke is cleared that we'll really see any differance in the ham ranks. Maybe an additional dumbass or two in the beginning then things will just float along as they are now. People need to simply stop stirring it like some here call themselves a slow code this or that and just get on with enjoying the hobby and let all this crap drop. Someone mentioned waivers. I know of only one but i'm sure there are plenty of others that went on after that and learned cw. The one i know is an expert at it now. He was tone deaf, could'nt hear the cw coming out of the tape player. He can now do over 40wpm in his head and talk to you at the same time in his shack while in qso. Most though only took this as an easy way out at the time. Thats just the way it is with our society. Well guess i've put my cents worth on this one. We'll all just have to get over it and carry on. Everyone stop cutting themselves down over the cw issue and get on with the hobby. As for myself all the bitching has took all the enjoyment out of it for me. I hear it everywhere and need to take some of my own advice and get back on the air. 73 all: John WR8D
Posted by
WR8D on 2005-08-14
KI4CFS said "Look the 'feared' CBers will never make the trip for they would have become technicans already."
You must not be active on the bands...the no-code CBers are all over the 2 meter repeaters where I live...they use 10-codes and "handles"....it gets so bad that the repeater trustees have to shut the repeaters off sometimes....
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-14
keep for extra at least
I see nothing wrong with keeping 5 wpm.
For the following reasons...
1. CW subbands, what happens to them?
2. it is a great back up mode during the low side of the solar cycle.
3. Tradition, History, what ever you want to call it.
5 wpm is not that hard to learn. At the very least we should keep a code requirement for the extra class ticket. And make that no less than 15 wpm.
Posted by
N6OFY on 2005-08-14
Dead Horse - Grab your whip!
Words, words and more words. When is the last time the ARRL or FCC paid attention to anything the amateur community had to say? It ain't gonna' matter how the vote goes, it's a done deal. There's been a 25 year dumbing down of amateur radio in order to broaden the ARRL magazine selling database. One hundred thousand negative comments to the proposal won't matter one bit.
By the way, after reading the previous comments, I have a question. Just what are we "saving" amateur radio from by eliminating the code?
de WD7F
John in Tucson
Posted by
WD7F on 2005-08-14
Code to Go?
From my perspective, CW is just another mode of operation among many. Some modes are easier to learn and operate than others. The diversity and choice of operation of what mode, where, when, and why is what makes Amateur Radio so exciting. CW won't go away any more than Packet will go away, or PSK31 will go away. Hey, AM is alive and well. All you have to do is use them. I learned to use CW and Packet, and PSK31. I tried them all and use the one's that interest me most.
It's a big world out there, let's keep out heads up and minds open.
Posted by
K0COM on 2005-08-14
Code should stay, its only 5WPM anyway!
I understand that many people are disappointed about the "dumbing down" of Ham testing and licensing. There are several reasons for this. We are a society of, well, lets face it, lazy people due to advances in technology.
On one hand, we have all these great advances which have made society better. On the negative, we dont have to do as much anymore, hence laziness. I admit that I have also fell victim to this.
Along with the advances, there is more we need to learn to maintain a well rounded capable society. The more well rounded, the less specialized. This is more evident in the HAM community. As I am studying and trying to pass my Extra, I know for a fact that I do not know as much as the extras and advanced classes that came before me.
I studied, and found it quite challenging, for the 5WPM morse code test. I know.. you all think that 5 WPM is nothing and I must be dumb for having a hard time with 5 WPM. But I did find it difficult, probably for the same reason I took music lessons for 3 years and still cant read sheet music. I just coulnt process it! But I struggled and passed.
I think we have more people like this in todays society because we are less able to concentrate due to the scattered and wide range of information we have to mentally process each day. As the world gets more complicated, the less we can be experts in a narrow field.
So... my comments may lend to the side of eliminating code, but I still think it should be kept, for nothing less then to show there is a level of dedication to acheive the top license, Extra Class. I am willing to compromise and say you can get rid of the requirement for General, but at least keep it for Extra!
If a peice of paper from a college or university says I can make more money (even though I may not know any more than a guy who has the experience without the paper) then Morse Code should be viewed as the same.
Code should be kept as a symbol of acheivement, a stepping stone to a higher level. Like a college degree, it is a symbol of acheivement! Be proud, and keep it for at least Extra class.
Posted by
KI4IEY on 2005-08-14
People like Oldfart13 should kick the bucket
Hey Oldfart - People like you are just going to fade away into the sunset anyway so why don't you do like a good ole' fart ... open the window and drift out. The debate is over, the FCC has made up it's mind. Take your geritol and have a good #2.
Posted by
BIRDMAN on 2005-08-14
I've seen people say that CW isn't really used much (KU4AB said that!) and people saying CW is antiquated.
At 1730Z I took a quick scan of 20 meters. I came across 17 CW QSO's and only 8 Phone QSO's. Now if CW is so antiuated and/or not use much and/or of little importance then why is CW used more than SSB???? Do the experiement for yourself and see, tune up and down the bands and be honest during your count.
George - KI4FIA - CW All The Way
http://www.MilAirComms.com
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-14
HEY BIRDMAN!!!
I guess Birdman is indicative of the new NO CODE HF Hams. 10-4 Good buddy!
Posted by
OLDFART13 on 2005-08-14
CW - YES......TESTING - NO
Today, CW is as much a useful and fun mode to operate as is has been from ham radio's beginnings. Even if a new ham starts out thinking CW is "old school", pretty soon it sinks in. There's a simple magic to it, and CW users are a fraternity unto themselves, one that is an honor to join. And it quickly becomes obvious that CW is nearly indispensable for DXing and Contesting. With all that going for it, it's a mystery to me why the amateur community seems upset that MANDATORY CW testing is going away.
I've heard it said that CW use is declining. Instead of wringing our hands and knashing our teeth, we should be welcoming this change as an opportunity to promote CW in a different way, and perhaps see it not only continue but actually prosper and grow in popularity. I see no reason to mourn the end of mandatory testing, which in practice shoves CW down the throats of newcomers who have yet to understand its potential value to them. I find that being forced to do something often creates a resistance that isn't based on any kind of reasonable value assessment.
Dropping the CW test requirement isn't the same as dropping CW use, but many are reacting as if CW had actually been BANNED. It hasn't been. And whining about a nonresponsive FCC gets us nowhere.... since when does the Government listen to us anyway? The FCC just barely seems to hear ham radio's loudest and most influential power lobby.... the ARRL. So, instead of fighting progress and change, let's find ways to make the new realities and technology work to promote greater CW use... based on CW's MERITS. With a positive, progressive approach we can preserve one of ham radio's most useful modes. and we don't need mandatory testing to do it.
73, Jerry K3BZ
Posted by
K3BZ on 2005-08-14
CW vs. Learning Electronics & Radio
I wonder why some hams think that iCW is magic but, learning electronics and radio physics has nothing to do with Ham radio?
Posted by
WA6BFH on 2005-08-14
WA6BFH said "I wonder why some hams think that iCW is magic but, learning electronics and radio physics has nothing to do with Ham radio? "
It's NOT called "learning" when you give the folks the questions and the answers....it's called memorization....not much is actually learned by this process, as can easily be seen on the local 2 meter repeaters in my area....
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-14
No Code
I do not beleive that CW is a thing of the past, i don"t ride horses to work,, I have a car, let the bands save space for CW, but do not make it mandatory to advance to a higher plane. My focus now is on ditigal communications,but thats my choice,and I will continue to use CW because it's just another mode in getting the message thru...W9CRB
Posted by
W9CRB on 2005-08-14
DX Cluster Spots
K4GMH 14041.8 G4ERW 08/14 2042 F6IIE 21015.0 FY5KAC 08/14 2043
DJ2OR 7050.0 R1FJL qrv time 08/14 2043
AA4XR 14076.0 YV5MA RTTY08/14 2043
OH2XX 14029.1 VE1OP 08/14 2043
CT1IUA 21008.8 VP2E WAE Booming08/14 2043
YL2KA 14025.0 K2QMF 08/14 2042
A71EM 14218.0 9K2YM Yaser GaMcOaae Zal GaSaG08/14 2042
W9CA 14055.8 OK2PAY 08/14 2042
KK5OQ 14056.1 LZ9WLZ 08/14 2041
OH2XX 14032.6 VP9/N0ED 08/14 2041
DS4BGR 14205.0 6L0NJ/4 IOTA AS-148 via HL4XM08/14 2040
LZ1ZP 144347.0 IO/IK0BZY Locator? I am ready for08/14 2040
A71EM 14185.1 IZ6BOX Tony is looking for NA08/14 2040
YL2KA 14023.3 K1TTT 08/14 2040
UY0LL 14078.0 YV5YMA RTTY08/14 2040
IZ8DPL 14209.0 EA3JE 59+60 in JN70FU ...!!!08/14 2040
CT1ITZ 14247.0 WY3P Tks.Carroll Cty 08/14 2040
K4KAL 14218.0 9K2YM 08/14 2039
YL9T 14022.7 K1AR 08/14 2039
I0QM 14009.4 N4BAA 08/14 2038
K9OSH 14015.6 UW5Q 08/14 2038
2E0IKW 18155.0 KP4SQ 08/14 2038
DF9YF 144374.0 LX3DX pse beam JO4208/14 2038
DL0WW 3524.0 ZC4LI 08/14 2037
Posted by
OLDFART13 on 2005-08-14
Learning?
>WA6BFH said "I wonder why some hams think that iCW is magic but, learning electronics and radio physics has nothing to do with Ham radio? "
It's NOT called "learning" when you give the folks the questions and the answers....it's called memorization....not much is actually learned by this process, as can easily be seen on the local 2 meter repeaters in my area....
Posted by RADIO123US on August 14, 2005<
::Well, "123US" (I wish you'd use a callsign), I agree with you. It's not just 2 meter repeater operators, though. Yesterday, the six meter band opened for several hours throughout much of the country, so it became, ostensibly, a "DX" band for a little while once again. And once again, as always happens, the *WORST* operators I ever hear anywhere are occupying bandwidth on six meters in the weak signal section of the band.
Sporadic-E often includes rapid QSB where signals can fade 50 dB inside a few seconds. They might come back, or they might not. To enjoy the band and the mode, and the propagation, requires some knowledge about how it works and the majority of six meter operators lack it. I answer somebody with "WB2WIK 59 Los Angeles, DM04, name is Steve, over," and they come back with their life story, only the first eleven syllables of which I'll ever hear because the band just faded. Not to mention that most don't get my callsign on the first try, and some not on the second or third try, either, despite my years of training in diction and annunciation to be a paid professional in the field.
Nincompoops.
Of course, that can happen on any band at any time, but it's most prevalent on six.
No question as to "why."
WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-14
DX is...
>DX Cluster Spots
K4GMH 14041.8 G4ERW 08/14 2042 F6IIE 21015.0 FY5KAC 08/14 2043
DJ2OR 7050.0 R1FJL qrv time 08/14 2043
AA4XR 14076.0 YV5MA RTTY08/14 2043
OH2XX 14029.1 VE1OP 08/14 2043
CT1IUA 21008.8 VP2E WAE Booming08/14 2043
YL2KA 14025.0 K2QMF 08/14 2042
A71EM 14218.0 9K2YM Yaser GaMcOaae Zal GaSaG08/14 2042
W9CA 14055.8 OK2PAY 08/14 2042
KK5OQ 14056.1 LZ9WLZ 08/14 2041
OH2XX 14032.6 VP9/N0ED 08/14 2041
DS4BGR 14205.0 6L0NJ/4 IOTA AS-148 via HL4XM08/14 2040
LZ1ZP 144347.0 IO/IK0BZY Locator? I am ready for08/14 2040
A71EM 14185.1 IZ6BOX Tony is looking for NA08/14 2040
YL2KA 14023.3 K1TTT 08/14 2040
UY0LL 14078.0 YV5YMA RTTY08/14 2040
IZ8DPL 14209.0 EA3JE 59+60 in JN70FU ...!!!08/14 2040
CT1ITZ 14247.0 WY3P Tks.Carroll Cty 08/14 2040
K4KAL 14218.0 9K2YM 08/14 2039
YL9T 14022.7 K1AR 08/14 2039
I0QM 14009.4 N4BAA 08/14 2038
K9OSH 14015.6 UW5Q 08/14 2038
2E0IKW 18155.0 KP4SQ 08/14 2038
DF9YF 144374.0 LX3DX pse beam JO4208/14 2038
DL0WW 3524.0 ZC4LI 08/14 2037
Posted by OLDFART13 on August 14, 2005<
::Not sure what point you're trying to make, but if it's that there's more DX activity on CW than other modes, that's impossible to dispute, so you're right. Of all the current "DX spots" at the moment I'm typing this, 18 out of 26 are CW, in the CW-only portions of the HF bands. Hey, that's just about the ratio of your posting, too...
...but I think most people already realize this.
WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-14
NPRM&O CW test elim.
I could support elimination of the CW requirement for the General license if:
1. Element 1 (5WPM CW) remained a requirement, in addition to Element 4, for an Extra Class license. This I feel is important, for while CW lacks the importance of prior times, partly due to other narrow bandwidth computer generated & decoded digital modes, e.g. PSK-31, it is not unreasonable to require the Extra class to pass a 5 WPM CW test, as this is the elete (in the positive sense) of the service, expected to have a greater that average knowledge of the technical and operating aspect of amateur radio, while allowing Generals to operate on a majority of the HF bands, consistant w/ WRC's recommendatin and many other countries recent rule changes.
2. The General Class Licensees continued (as is now the case, to NOT have privleges in the Advanced & Extra portions of the band, i.e. no auto upgrades of existing Novice, General or Advanced classes.
3. (others may feel this is excessive -- thay may even be correct <grin>) No privledges in ANY of the CW/RTT/Data portions of the HF bands, though this might force some digital modes into the phone portions of the bands.
Respectfully,
de KB1LKR
Posted by
KB1LKR on 2005-08-14
CW Freqs
First, its disheartening to read some of the comments; licensed hams bickering like CBer's. This is ham radio, not the Jerry Springer show; get a life!
Well I never completely agreed with the licensing as it is now.
I agree that ham licenses should be available to people with the technincal know-how without the CW test. But, I dont agree with giving CW privileges to people who have no CW proficecy.
My suggestion is this:
Extra Plus: all privileges (13wpm exam)
Extra: all phone and atv (HF/VHF/UHF)
General Plus : same as General now (5wpm exam)
General: General Plus minus all digital modes/freqs
Technician: as is, no changes
That means if you pass the Extra written and the 5wpm code, you would have Extra phone and General digital privileges.
Posted by
KA7QOR on 2005-08-14
Bill O'Reilly
Editorial in dozens of syndicated newspapers around the country today 8/14/05:
"A SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT IS THE PATH TO FAILURE."
Interesting comment, considering the subject here.
How many hams are CEOs, COOs, CFOs, large business owners and millionaires? Now, let's see how many of them have no-code licenses.
Oops.
WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-14
Here we go again
Hey K1MANN (nice 1X4 call for 1D1OTS es L1DS), I really don't care much for what you have to say but...I was almost crying laughing at your last post. Not bad for a no-code rookie...hihi...keep it up.
However,
Keep the code exam for the Extra class license. It's that simple folks. Think about it.
Posted by
OLDFART13 on 2005-08-14
http://v6.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200%257E20951%257E3008961,00.html
All the anti-code folks here need to read this article....I think Bill O'Reilly has nailed it...it's too bad that the anti-code folks won't see their error until it's too late....
Posted by
RADIO123US on 2005-08-14
>>>>>*** C Average MBA 'student'. Pretty soon even he might
be able to pass an Amateur Exam.
Posted by K1MANN on August 13, 2005 <<<<<
Guess what? Kerry had a lower average than bush. Get over it gurls kerry lost but you liberals may win with a welfare ham license soon to come; no work required.
Posted by
OLDFART13 on 2005-08-14
Someone needs to explain the great depression to Bill O'Reilly. The one in the thirties first and then the one that's coming.
If he ever understands that, then, maybe, he'll be able to figure out why the myth of hard work always leading to success is a myth.
If he doesn't get that, I'll be happy to introduce him to a lot of hard working, well educated americans who never managed to succede even in the boom periods. You can find them in every industry.
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-14
Code requirement
Well, as an advanced class operator, it seems to me that the code requirement should only be required for extra class. Although I have passed 20 wpm years ago, I do think that 5 wpm should be retained for the top class. And of course, set aside new CW ONLY portions of each HF band.
73,
Lou Rubens
West Central Florida, USA
Posted by Louis T. Rubens on 2005-08-13Good Bye Code?
Seems as if code is going the way of the horse drawn carriage and is being replaced by the gas driven car. We can get to places faster, have more congestion, pollute the air and destroy what little good environment that is left. So lets go for it - crowd the bands (if we are lucky) - loose the code requirement, we are a lazy lot and don't need to work for anything-just give it to us. Why take a test anyway? Go to Walmart and buy it for $5 go home and operate. Who needs good operators anyway?
I think code should stay a part of our studies and a method to communicate. CW is an art form and should be used when needed. The FCC has sold us out, continues to do so; so speak up and let them know how you feel-one way or the other- do something!
Posted by
KA1VT on 2005-08-13
New Test Requirements
Here are the new test requirements for 2011.
1) RF theory - 25%
2) Basic Appliance Operator Knowledge - 75% (A+ certification proving knowledge and competency in core hardware and operating system technologies including installation, configuration, diagnosing, preventive maintenance and basic networking.)
Posted by
KG6AMW on 2005-08-13
I propose
I for one suggest that we all identify ourselves with what
speed of Morse Code we passed:
K1AAA/20
or
K1AAA/13
or
K1AAA/5
or
K1AAA/Entitlement
Posted by
K1MANN on 2005-08-13
test *everybody* again
I say good riddance to the code requirement, but let's test *everybody* again as their licenses expire.
Most of the "extras" I hear on the radio could not pass the written general test now if they had to. I show up to field day with my lowly tech license and I have to solder on PL-259s because the "extras" can't do it themselves.
The FCC describes amateur radio as "...for qualified persons of any age who are interested in radio technique... These services present an opportunity for self-training, intercommunication, and technical investigations." So how does CW fit into modern 21st century amateur radio operations? It is one of very many possible techniques.
Contrary to arguments presented time and time again, CW capability is not a good "filter" to keep out the "CBers". There are plenty of lids on HF already, just listen! The CW requirement as a "filter" doesn't work -- read the "Riley letters" on www.arrl.org; most of those cited are tech-plus or higher.
I think that the license classes should be based on demonstrated technical and operating knowledge, with increasing access to available bands and power as the license grade increases. The ability to operate effectively, safely, and in a cooperative and responsible matter should be paramount.
Therefore, I think the examinations should focus on operating technique, safety, technical and legal parameters more than anything else, and everybody should be re-tested every 10 years to make sure we are all current. You can call this the "technical competency filter."
I volunteer to go first.
Jeff
Posted by
N1KDO on 2005-08-13
good job Fcc
I have most of the code now ,fail it once and going Back to take it again , But thanks fcc a job well done , and its long over due should Have Been done years ago I think.once I get on hf just might learn to send it , But my plans Right now just Rec-it to get on hf ,
Posted by
KD4MXE on 2005-08-13
I don't recall
I don't seem to recall anyone whining that "..I can't learn
the code..." when the old requirements were in force
(20,13,5)
As time goes on, Americans are just getting more lazy.
No wonder the 'thinking jobs' are going to India.
Next thing, the exams will have no math or physics
because people will complain that "...I just can't learn the
math..."
I believe it is a done deal. Morse Code exam will be gone
forever.
The lowering of standards for Amateur Radio are simply a
symptom of the downfall of America.
Now if we can just get that bufoon Bush*** out of office.
*** C Average MBA 'student'. Pretty soon even he might
be able to pass an Amateur Exam.
Posted by
K1MANN on 2005-08-13
Code for or against
First off let me say that I don't have the code licence. I am only a tech. I feel that code is an important part of amateur radio and always will be. But I don't think that anyone who wants to get into this hobby should be forced to have to learn to every operating mode there is to be able to enjoy it. I personally will learn code one day and use it. But I have not interest RTTY or PSK31 and I'm not forced to have to test to show I can use those modes. I think dropping the code requirement to allow HF access is a good idea. It allows people to experince more of the hobby. Those that want to learn to operate in certain areas will take the time to learn the requirements for that mode of operation. I do feel that to earn the extra class licence code should be kept as a requirement. Since extra is the highest class in this hobby its only fitting that one should have to demonstrate a full knowledge of what amateur is all about. Taking code out is not going to the end of code and the downfall of amateur radio. If code testing is a must then maybe they should consider adding computer testing also since so many are now using it in the hobby.
But hey this is just my thoughts on this topic.
Posted by
KD5TPU on 2005-08-13
Extras only.
I say we should KEEP THE CODE FOR EXTRA CLASS! Anyone who can't support this should just go back to internet chat rooms.
Posted by
OLDFART13 on 2005-08-13
hmmm
I am thinking of being an "eyes, ears, nose and throat" doctor.
If I am not interested in the foot, why should I have to learn the anatomy of the foot?
-----------------
Why do I need to learn about Ancient Rome in order to get a college degree?
-----------------
Hard work builds character (as if learning Morse Code is 'hard work')
-----------------
Many organizations practice 'hazing'. Hazing is a way of building comradery amongst a group. Morse Code perhaps is the 'hazing' of amateur radio.
-----------------
What amazes me is that if one spent the same time listening to a Morse Code practice tape as they spend bitching about how hard it is, they would learn morse code in about 2 weeks. That's all it takes.
Posted by
K1MANN on 2005-08-13
Let's all continue the debate
Let's all continue this debate on 14.010+-QRM.
Any takers?
Posted by
K1MANN on 2005-08-13
The Code War
Quoted from KH2D
If you've been a ham for a few years, or a CB'er for a few years, you know about The War. The war to rid the world of the Evil Morse Code. The war was fought fiercely by two different groups - the 'No Coders' and the 'Coders'. The 'No Coders' said that Morse code was a violation of their civil rights, and they beat the doors down at the FCC writing petitions and making speeches. The 'Coders' said that removing the Morse code was a terrible idea, because it lowered our 'standards' and allowed those slimy CB'ers into our ranks. But the 'Coders' didn't do such a good job of beating the doors down at the FCC and making speeches, because most of them were too busy chasing post cards. So the 'No Coders' won. They had better leadership, like Ready To Make A Buck Freddy, W5YI. The only leadership the 'Coders' had was the ARRL - a radio club in Newington, Connecticut that used to have political influence with the FCC but doesn't any more. The 'Coders' made the mistake of thinking the ARRL was taking care of business, but in reality they were busy hoping back and forth across the fence trying to keep magazine subscribers (and their jobs).
So who really won the war? The 'NoCoders' did. And who lost the war? Amateur radio did. Amateur radio was so deeply divided by the war that it will never again be the same. Brain Dead Old Farts will continue to collect post cards and continue to spit on Clueless Newbies whenever one gets close enuff to spit on until the day arrives when all the Brain Dead Old Farts have become Silent Keys. Clueless Newbies will continue to pester people on YAHOO! groups until they learn about six dollar plastic microphones and sound cards, but they will never gain the knowledge about amateur radio thru the one on one "Elmering" system that so many of us were fortunate enuff to have available back in the days when we were Clueless Newbies. Amateur radio is DIVIDED. Deeply divided. And it was badly scarred by the war. And those scars will never heal completely.
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-13
re:re: cry like a baby
I just thought someone might get a kick out of this ass hole, amfone is at it again.
let me begin by telling you that i passed the 5wpm code exam, went fron tech to extra in little more than a year, oh and i am tone deaf, with overall hearing imparement. now for the email i recieved:
amfone <amfone@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
phil
I meant to tell how phoney you are about being tone deaf. That would have nothing to do with not being able to learn the code. What it does tell me is that you found the right doctor to cheat on the system. I use to go up to 10 meters and talk with the novices. Over and over again they all told me, " they just can't learn the code". I would ask how often do you make a cw contact , and the answer would always be " months ago"..Lazy is the real word for this matter. "Its the code" it is just too hard to work for and I am lazy but I want to have all the abitly to play radio but not work for it.. By the way MT WIFE IS AN AUDIOOLIGIST, she laughed when she read your "disability"... she agreed you're just lazy and shopped for a doctor.
One thing is for sure, other than cheats like you,, no real ham who WORKED for their ticket has any respect for you , and when you look in the mirror, you don't have any either.
I will not bother any one with this again,but just wanted to make the point that there are already ass holes and morons
on hf .
Posted by
KG4WKL on 2005-08-13
Oh stop!
Just grow up you old farts. I passed my General about 6 months ago.. spent a couple of weeks wasting my time learning code so I could speak and do digital on HF... I still play around with CW but why on gods earth should people be required to learn this to work on HF? How lame, just get over it and fade away into the sunset you old sour coots.
Let us have some fun. You'll be surprised how many of us new hams will take this hobby to a new level with or without CW.
Posted by
BIRDMAN on 2005-08-13
Oh stop!
Just grow up you old farts. I passed my General about 6 months ago.. spent a couple of weeks wasting my time learning code so I could speak and do digital on HF... I still play around with CW but why on gods earth should people be required to learn this to work on HF? How lame, just get over it and fade away into the sunset you old sour coots.
Let us have some fun. You'll be surprised how many of us new hams will take this hobby to a new level with or without CW.
Posted by
BIRDMAN on 2005-08-13
Oh stop!
Just grow up you old farts. I passed my General about 6 months ago.. spent a couple of weeks wasting my time learning code so I could speak and do digital on HF... I still play around with CW but why on gods earth should people be required to learn this to work on HF? How lame, just get over it and fade away into the sunset you old sour coots.
Let us have some fun. You'll be surprised how many of us new hams will take this hobby to a new level with or without CW.
Posted by
BIRDMAN on 2005-08-13
HEY BIRDMAN!!!
Hey Birdman, what does that "Refresh" button do? Hit it a few more time and find out. You're really takeing us to a new level.
Posted by
OLDFART13 on 2005-08-13
I think dropping code can save ham
Look the 'feared' CBers will never make the trip for they would have become technicans already. Maybe dropping code would slow down the number of new ham's that drop out and encourage more to get to the next level. Look they are not dropping the testing requirements, just code. We live in a culture where code does not have the meaning it use to. I personally think learning code is a great idea and but should not be required to get below 6 meters. I think those againest it should consider that keep code may actually damage the future of ham and realize that frequencies not used may be lost.
Posted by
KI4CFS on 2005-08-13
Dead Horse
I am against the whole drop the code issue, but not for the same reason as others.
I am a tradtionalist to a degree. I think CW is a trade mark of the amateur service. When I tell people I am a ham, the first thing they say is "You are one of those people that go dit dit dit Da". Well that will soon end.
What do I think it will do to the service/hobby? It can only make it better from a functional stand point. Let us face the fact that most of the new things in radio are geared to be on VHF and up. Right now you have some of the smartest people in radio that only have a Technician license. I think these people getting on HF could be nothing but a benefit to the hobby.
Well, some one is going to make the comment about bad operators. Well, since I have started being able to read faster code, I have heared just as many bad operators on CW than I have on Voice. Not only that, but then hide bad language behind abreviations. So if you high an mighty self rightous CW guys are trying to say that CW will keep the riff raff out, think again. There is plenty of riff raff past 20 words a minute...lol We will not even go into what happens on certain bands on Phone. Heck, they even have lids on PSK31...lol
On last thing noone takes into account. Effort and dollars. You either have to have one, the other, or both to get on HF. This alone will keep at least the broke and lazy hams off HF. Even if the person has all of this, then comes the task of finding people who will talk to. Most people only have the oportunity to talk on nets. If the net control is in the right place to hear you!
I had a van full of HF gear, and spent most of my time on VHF and UHF. I just found it more chalenging and exciting. Talk 2000 miles on 40 meters, no big deal. Talk 100miles on 6 meters from your car, totally big deal!!!!
Frankly, if a person is interested in HF that much, they would already be there. Another issue is finding people to talk to even if you choose to get on CW. Frankly, unless you know someone, it is not that easy to hold a convo on CW at 5 words a minute. Most operators will not even work you unless you are the only one out there. Man, that will make a new CW operator feel welcome......NOT!
10/12 meters
At least we may get some use out of these bands. Part of the reason not much has been devoloped for these bands is the lack of local usage. 10 meters is a good cross town communications band, and so is 12 meters. Dropping the code requirement could only help put these bands into better use when propagation is not available! This would also reduce the number of technicians operating illegally on freeband because of the code test issue. This is a bigger problem than people care to admit! Frankly I would much rather talk to my friend across town, or down the road Simplex/Direct than on repeaters all of the time.
Anyhow, whatever happens will happen. I will always be proud to be an Amateur Radio Operator despite things that I dislike about the hobby.
How about you?
--... ...--
Phineas
K0KMA
Posted by
PHINEAS on 2005-08-13
Poll is missing an answer
ARRL poll (about 9 times more respondants):
What is your opinion about the recent FCC proposal to discontinue Morse code testing for Amateur Radio licenses?
Fine with me 48.5 % (4604)
It is a terrible idea 47.1 % (4465)
I don't care either way 4.4 % (415)
Total votes: 9484
ARRL's web poll is the only one I've seen where "I don't care either way" is a possible answer. Maybe if these other polls offered that answer, the results would be different.
Not to mention all those people who voted twice on ANY poll.
Posted by
N0XMZ on 2005-08-12
Here come the C.B.er's
Breaker Breaker good buddy
That's all we need.
I got into ham radio to get away from that stuff. My station will probably end up on ebay soon.
73's
KC8RQH
Posted by
KC8RQH on 2005-08-12
Here come the C.B.er's
Breaker Breaker good buddy
That's all we need.
I got into ham radio to get away from that stuff. My station will probably end up on ebay soon.
73's
KC8RQH
Posted by
KC8RQH on 2005-08-12
Goodbye CW -- hello PSK
Posted by
W4MAY on 2005-08-12
W3DCG/NT4XT on 05-235
I've mentioned to friends that I'd rather have a percentage of something rather than any percentage of nothing. Also, I like- LIKE - the idea of promoting sales of HF gear/peripherals for our manufacturers. Yet, I do believe that CW competency should be demonstrated by all who engage in Amateur HF communication, based upon longstanding tradition. Were it not required I'd still not get on HF, until I could pass 13 wpm, if it were administered. But that is just me, and yes there are many other valuable digital modes, (all requiring a TNC or computer+sound card interface).
It seems to me, that long-standing cultures that have withstood the test of hundreds or thousands of years, have looked upon history as something vital to their continued significance. Amateur Radio is a culture that in this regard, should be considered similarly.
Therefore, regarding FCC Docket 05-235, my official comments on this matter were and are as follows:
Dear People,
Despite PRB-1 [97.15(e)]- it seems to be accepted that antenna structures within Historic Districts pre-empt any rights otherwise afforded by PRB-1.
This points to the importance we as Americans place on history.
With regard to Morse requirements:
1) The Amateur service is the only service actively engaged in Morse Code and
2) CW or Morse Code- was and always will remain- the Genesis mode, the mode that started all wireless as we know it today, and- based upon values we place on History, the 5 wpm Morse requirement must be kept in place for Extra class license privilege.
Also, Morse code is a mode known to get through in difficult propagation conditions, with minimal equipment, and no other digital interface/encoding/decoding/modulating is required. Thus it remains important that the United States continue to promote a pool of citizenry that is competent in Morse transmission. Retaining the 5 wpm requirement for Extra Class privilege is the means by with to achieve this goal, while preserving a most important tradition within the Amateur community. Morse code, aka CW- IS TRULY THE HEART AND SOUL OF AMATEUR RADIO. I as well as others, strongly admonish you, our FCC, to reconsider the proposal to eliminate entirely Element 1 from all Amateur licensing. Many of us ask merely that the historical significance and value of CW be officially acknowledged, in a compromise that would require 5 wpm Morse proficiency as a prerequisite to Extra Class Amateur privilege. Thank you kindly for your consideration.
D.Cy Gacuzana, NT4XT.
Posted by
NT4XT on 2005-08-12
License from Sears?
Can we now buy our license from Sears Roebuck and Co or will it be like CB where no license or adherence to rules applies to amateur radio? Remember what happened to 220, so you can assume the same will happen to the new CBHam bands.
Posted by
AA8X on 2005-08-12
NO Code!
I have been around since 1968. (WN9AJP) The code has never made the operator. The Elmers, and Friends have made the operator though instruction in both good operating and electronic theory.
If the number of operators does not increase, then we will all lose. Bands will be given away. New equiptment costs will increase as increased production costs will raise the final price.
I also, believe that if sales of the radio equipment do not increase, then R&D will come to a halt. No New Models, No Improvements.
Plain and simple, No new operators, No Growth!
73, and Good Health, Jeff - K9JP
Posted by
K9JP on 2005-08-12
NO Code!
I have been around since 1968. (WN9AJP) The code has never made the operator. The Elmers, and Friends have made the operator though instruction in both good operating and electronic theory.
If the number of operators does not increase, then we will all lose. Bands will be given away. New equiptment costs will increase as increased production costs will raise the final price.
I also, believe that if sales of the radio equipment do not increase, then R&D will come to a halt. No New Models, No Improvements.
Plain and simple, No new operators, No Growth!
73, and Good Health, Jeff - K9JP
Posted by
K9JP on 2005-08-12
GEEEEEZ!
It is certainly a shame that you people do not have any strong opinions!
I think all of this brotherly love shown on this thread really would be better shown on
QRM.COM where folks really know just how to flame and not get banned by Fred!
Just my "two dits" worth!
Posted by
K4JSR on 2005-08-12
Cry like a baby
I have never heard so much crying about something that makes no diference.I am a slow code extra,if not for the reduction in code speed I would have never came over from cb or charlie brown as i like to call it.I have ton of technical abillity and that all came from improvising charlie brown junk for many many years.Dont get me wrong I love ham radio but if the code wasnt slower, i would have never passed. I am tone deaf and have little to no intrest in the code.let the new hams decide if they want to work code or not, and if they act like charlie browners you have two choices, #1 take care of them the charlie brown way ( a box of hat pins will do wonders) or #2 report them and let our governing agency do its job. Now this is just my opinion and i am sure not everyone will agree with me but that is the beauty of freedom.
Posted by
KG4WKL on 2005-08-12
Cry like a baby
I have never heard so much crying about something that makes no diference.I am a slow code extra,if not for the reduction in code speed I would have never came over from cb or charlie brown as i like to call it.I have ton of technical abillity and that all came from improvising charlie brown junk for many many years.Dont get me wrong I love ham radio but if the code wasnt slower, i would have never passed. I am tone deaf and have little to no intrest in the code.let the new hams decide if they want to work code or not, and if they act like charlie browners you have two choices, #1 take care of them the charlie brown way ( a box of hat pins will do wonders) or #2 report them and let our governing agency do its job. Now this is just my opinion and i am sure not everyone will agree with me but that is the beauty of freedom.
Posted by
KG4WKL on 2005-08-12
Done Deal in Canada
It is now a done deal in Canada. I like the code very much myself. As of July 29th 2005 Morse code is no longer the sole requirement to gain access to our HF Frequencies. Morse Code tests are still one aspect the Candidate can gain access to HF if they has a hard time with getting 80% which requires good background of Electronic Theory. Advanced, Basic holders with 3 years on the air and Basic holders that got 80% or more on their exam gained access to HF on that day. The current exams are not easy to score 80% on. I hope that Code Proficiency is still encouraged by Contesting and keeping our CW Sub bands.Other digital modes PSK31, Good ole' RTTY, and Mfsk16 have opened up a whole new area of Weak Signal robust communications. Today CW Morse Code is just one of the new ways a New Ham can Explore the pleasure of the HF bands. Let's welcome them to the Air Waves and encourage them to become good op's.
73
Gerry
Posted by
VE7BGP on 2005-08-12
No protection needed
Is Morse Code so useless and difficult that it needs to be protected? Of course not. Remove the requirement, and let it stand or fall on its own. My bet is that it will stay as long as we have No. 2 pencils and safety matches. Will they ever find a mode as simple and efficient as CW? Of course not! Forget the worry and just pound brass.
Posted by
AI2IA on 2005-08-12
re: cry like a baby
I got this in my email from someone to chicken to leave their call.
"amfone" <amfone@sbcglobal.net>
Quote
"Wish you would have stayed on the chicken , you proof of the reason real hams are
opposed to the lower code issue. If your too lazy to work what good are you.
We don't need more CB'ers we need more hams"
This fine example of "good Hams" is bashing me for a hearing imparement i have no controll over.Thats what we have now, how will the cbr's hurt things?
Posted by
KG4WKL on 2005-08-12
The Code rules
I am also one who took the Morse code test before it goes away..do not want to be consider a second class General Class.
Posted by
KG4ZCH on 2005-08-12
re: cry like a baby
I got this in my email from someone to chicken to leave their call.
"amfone" <amfone@sbcglobal.net>
Quote
"Wish you would have stayed on the chicken , you proof of the reason real hams are
opposed to the lower code issue. If your too lazy to work what good are you.
We don't need more CB'ers we need more hams"
This fine example of "good Hams" is bashing me for a hearing imparement i have no controll over.Thats what we have now, how will the cbr's hurt things?
Posted by
KG4WKL on 2005-08-12
keep it drop it I dont care
Posted by
KC8YXA on 2005-08-12
Get over it!
Times change people! The average ham radio operator is grumpy, and old it seems. Do you all really want ham radio to die? Isn't it a great hobby, why do you not care about its future.
Just because you drove a Model T Ford, doesnt mean everyone else needs to. Just because you built a yagi or amp by hand doesnt mean every has too. Face it equipment these days is 100x better then it was 20 years ago. Things change, get over it! If you want to use CW use it, dont make everyone learn CW because you love it. I like more salt on my pizza then most, however I dont campaign for every pizza place to add more salt. Nor do I use the lame argument you have to try salty pizza to know if you like it.
I hate listening to the boring conversations that take place on 99% of all ham freqs. If your not complaining about something your not happy. If your not butting into everyones business your not happy. Ham radio can be fun, and exciting. Who cares if someone never builds anything by hand, and enjoyes the hobby, or learns code.
You all said when the no-code tech license came out ham radio was over. Wow, it seems that was FALSE! Old hams hate change, they rather die with the hobby before a new generation enjoys the hobby.
Face it Ham Radio will change with you or without you. Stop being rude to new hams, stop trying to make yourself feel good by putting down no-code techs and cbers. I hate to tell you, 99% of you were cbers......and shhhhhhhh dont tell anyone STILL ARE!!!!!! One day ham radio operators will be as cool as the equipment they talk on! ((or atleast thats avaialble at AES)) Enjoy your fighting, one day with you or without you there will be no CW required, hopefully by then you wouldnt have driven all the youth away.
Posted by
KC2AXD on 2005-08-11
Code Elimination
I never wanted to learn morse code but the rules were that I had too. I found that once I got to 10 wpm it was fun using morse code. If learning the code was an option I doubt I would have ever tried to learn the code. A 5 WPM code requirement doesn't seem like a big deal.
It's obvious the cw requirement will be eliminated and this will also make the ham bands less active.If I were the FCC and given how relatively inactive the voice bands are plus the need for a lot less frequency space for cw I would cut the Amateur Radio frequency allocation by about 50%. Hopefully, the FCC won't cut our frequency allocations but I suspect eliminating CW is a step in that direction.
Posted by
K1MMI on 2005-08-11
Code Elimination
I never wanted to learn morse code but the rules were that I had too. I found that once I got to 10 wpm it was fun using morse code. If learning the code was an option I doubt I would have ever tried to learn the code. A 5 WPM code requirement doesn't seem like a big deal.
It's obvious the cw requirement will be eliminated and this will also make the ham bands less active.If I were the FCC and given how relatively inactive the voice bands are plus the need for a lot less frequency space for cw I would cut the Amateur Radio frequency allocation by about 50%. Hopefully, the FCC won't cut our frequency allocations but I suspect eliminating CW is a step in that direction.
Posted by
K1MMI on 2005-08-11
CBers to Ham
WB2Wik...Well sir there nothing wrong with comming from CB radio to ham.Many of my ham friends have road this old horse and are really great ham's.Yes i will have to agree that this day and time CB radio is not the best to hear,But also you must not get on and listen to 75/80 meters.Kinda reminds you of the CB bands.Yes i was a CBer for many years befor i got my ham ticket in 1985,And enjoy the hobby of cb radio too.I been a ham now for 20 years and notice that amateur radio is not the cleanest either.but who cares if on comes from the cb bands to ham or no bands at all,There there for the hobby and not just a WANTABEE like i have found several so called hams i have met.....
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
cussing or code
W4XKE: I am not defending anyone and as far as cussing on amateur radio,I dont know what tree you fell out of but that been going on for many years,Long befor you and i got a ham ticket.Watch TV or listen to several radio stations or walk in a store.Dude it there also,But i gess you do as much as anyone else,If no one like to hear it i hope they got a on/off switch on there radio or can move the vfo on to some thing else.And i think your off topic too.But gess your one of those wantbee frequency cops call OOO...Learn the code!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
Morse code testing
For the past couple of weeks I have been reading the comments by those that are for and against the FCC�s NPRM to eliminate Morse code testing. I have come to the conclusion that I am tired of reading all the inflated comments and bogus claims from the CW Bleeding Hearts and Pre-Madonna Social Club.
They claim that it is a �Right of Passage� since they had to pass the code test; then everyone has to pass the code test. Otherwise you�re not a Real Ham. Just what is the definition of a �Real Ham� anyway? I have been an electronics engineer for over 30 years with a degree in Electronics Engineering. In 1999 after 6 months of study and practice, I took and passed the code test to get my General Class license. After passing the code test, I was walking back to my car and vowed that I would forget Morse code and never ever use it again. I earned my Amateur Extra license in 2000 and I�m also a Volunteer Examiner with W5YI. Am I a �Real Ham� or not?
Others claim that Amateur Radio will turn into CB radio. The average CB�r goes to Radio Shack and purchases a CB radio and gets on the air �Good Buddy�. Most people interested in Amateur Radio will take the time to learn about the hobby and the service. They will purchase study materials or take amateur radio courses. They will seek out other hams and Ham Clubs to learn more. These are just average people seeking something more than CB radio and are willing to earn the privilege to operate on the ham bands. As a VE, I see people come in each month to take their exams. I can tell those who took the time to study and pass their exams. I have seen those that took and passed a few practice exams on the Internet, but failed badly on the written exam due to lack of study.
There are those that claim the Ham Exams are �Dummied Down�. They claim that people don�t study for the exam, they memorize the question pool. Back when I went to school, I had to memorize names, dates, places, formulas, etc. We called that �studying for an exam�. If you feel the ham exams have been dummied down, than when was the last time you sent your comments and suggestions to the NCVEC organization when they revise one of the question pools each year. If you never wrote to the NCVEC, than shut up!
When I look back to the 50�s, 60�s and early 70�s, life was much simpler and families took time in the evenings for hobbies and crafts. That time is almost gone today. Family members are rushing to work, to school, to practice, to the game, to the concert, etc. Most people just don�t have the quality time anymore to learn and become proficient in Morse code. I still remember the time when I built radio controlled model airplanes and boats. Today you take it out of the box, put in the batteries and you�re ready to fly it.
I have read the Notice of Proposed Rule Making by the FCC and totally agree with what the FCC stated in the conclusion.
IV. CONCLUSION
47. In summary, we believe that the public interest will be served by revising the amateur service rules to eliminate the telegraphy testing requirement. We also believe that these proposed rule changes will allow amateur service licensees to better fulfill the purpose of the amateur service and will enhance the usefulness of the amateur service to the public and licensees.
I also agree with the FCC�s observations stated in sections 17 and 18.
17. Our review of the petitions and comments in the present proceeding finds that the majority agree with the Commission�s observation in the Restructure Report and Order that an individual's ability to demonstrate increased Morse code proficiency is not necessarily indicative of his or her ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art.
18. As discussed below, we tentatively conclude that, given the changes in the Radio Regulations, maintaining a telegraphy requirement for the Amateur Extra Class license would not be in the public interest. Therefore, we propose to remove the telegraphy examination requirement as one of the requirements for the Amateur Extra Class operator license.
The VEC over our VE team has been a ham for over 50 years and is retired living on a fixed income. We use an old computer that our VEC was able to afford on his limited income in order to administer the code test each month. As a result of transporting this old computer to and from the test sessions, the computer is prone to break downs causing us at times to turn away people wanting to take a code test. W5YI does not supply its VEC�s with computers, just computer software for code exams and written exams.
My favorite mode of communication is PSK31 and I didn�t have to take a proficiency test to use this mode. No one had to take a proficiency test to operate AM, Side Band, Slow Scan TV, Amateur TV, Packet, RTTY, Satellite, Moon Bounce, etc. So far, no one has convinced me that taking and passing a code test is necessary to be qualified to operate on the HF bands and to contribute to the advancement of amateur radio.
This does not mean the death of CW, just a test requirement. CW will be around as long as there are people that like to operate in that mode. There are people today that operate in AM mode. How long has AM been an antique mode? CW may become the mode of choice for a lot of people because of its simplicity. As for keeping the so called riffraff out of the hobby, we don�t want to keep people out. As licensed hams, we want to bring people in and teach them how to be good operators and enjoy the hobby and provide a service to the community. It is the responsibility of the Ham Clubs to make sure that people understand what amateur radio is about and what we can do.
KF4TQV
Posted by
KF4TQV on 2005-08-11
code
to me this is the end of ham radio as i know it i think cw is a good mode lots of fun must for the extra lic what is 5 wpm i got my extra i copy 20 wpm i was so happy that day. my self think ham radio is dead ham radio fading a way i still love my radio will be gonig way so lic 45 yrs now
wendell k1lwi
Posted by
K1LWI on 2005-08-11
Let's look at this...
>N2BR wrote: CBers to Ham
WB2Wik...Well sir there nothing wrong with comming from CB radio to ham.Many of my ham friends have road this old horse and are really great ham's.<
::If prospective hams or FCC staffers happened to drop by to review what we discuss, I wonder what their impression would be here? "There" should be "there's." "Comming" should be "coming." "Ham" should be "ham radio" or "amateur radio," or many things, but "ham" isn't one of them. "Road" should be "rode" (although it really should be "have ridden"). And "great ham's" should be "great hams." So, in a single 27-word sentence, there were at least five pretty notable errors. Are we making a good impression on others in this way?
>Yes i will have to agree that this day and time CB radio is not the best to hear,But also you must not get on and listen to 75/80 meters.<
::More errors, but at this point, who cares? The real issue is: I've listened to 75 meters, and it's horrible, which is why I very rarely operate on 75 meters. Don't put "80 meters" into the same category, because it's not. 80 meters is the part of the band below 3.75 MHz, which for Americans is currently all CW and digital mode operation, and this part of the band is populated with ladies and gentlemen who operate very nicely. I've never heard anything on 80m CW that I would be embarrassed for others to hear.
>Kinda reminds you of the CB bands.Yes i was a CBer for many years befor i got my ham ticket in 1985,And enjoy the hobby of cb radio too.I been a ham now for 20 years and notice that amateur radio is not the cleanest either.but who cares if on comes from the cb bands to ham or no bands at all,There there for the hobby and not just a WANTABEE like i have found several so called hams i have met.....<
::Again, I'll ignore all the grammatical and spelling errors here and fervently hope nobody important is reading this. With your posting, you have actually made my point, exactly -- and reinforced it. I do know a few great "CB to ham radio" converts who are very nice people and good operators. But not many. It's not one's class of license, but one's class of character; and for some reason, the majority of CBers I've come across are sadly lacking in the latter.
-WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-11
No rules for CB'ers
N2BR wrote: "But gess your one of those wantbee frequency cops call OOO"
Do we seem to have big problem acknowledging that there are any rules or authority? Once a CB'er - Always a CB'er.
ARRL/VEC
225 Main Street
Newington, CT 06111-1494
Attn: Mr. Bart Jahnke RE: Cookeville, TN, Amateur Examination Sessions, December 14, 1999, and March 11, 2000
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
We have completed our review of the above Amateur Radio Service examination sessions. Based upon the facts that:
1) members of the VE team participated in the examination of applicants they knew, or should have known, to be related to certain VEs, contrary to Section 97.509(d) of Commission rules; and
2) the actual examination location and date of one of the tests (for a disabled person) were concealed and represented to be at a different location and date, we recommend that you not accept VE services from the following persons:
1. James N. Keaton, W4SOH
2. Marcia C. Droke, KC4FLW
3. George S. Droke, W5SD
4. Bobby A. Raymer, N2BR
5. Steven G. Hunter, KF4FAV
Please emphasize to your VEs that every participating or administering VE shares responsibility for the administration, oversight and integrity of the test session. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Posted by
W4XKE on 2005-08-11
Good info
W4XKE: Classic.
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-11
Flame WAR!!!
W4IKE: Yep i was once a CBer and Damm sure glad of it too!
At least i never been a WANTA-BEE Ham Like yourself.There nothing wrong with CB Radio or comming from the CB bands to Ham Dude!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
Done Deal
When the FCC ask for comments it is just a formality. Whether you are for it or against it. It's a "Done Deal".
I for one will be glad when it is over so we can all unite to fight BPL. A far FAR worse threat to our hobby than having new blood joining the ranks.
Posted by
W5DXE on 2005-08-11
Done Deal
When the FCC ask for comments it is just a formality. Whether you are for it or against it. It's a "Done Deal".
I for one will be glad when it is over so we can all unite to fight BPL. A far FAR worse threat to our hobby than having new blood joining the ranks.
Posted by
W5DXE on 2005-08-11
Bitch Bitch Bitch
WB2WIK & His Son W4XKE ?
Who reall care about rules no one give a dam anymore about them so why worrie.This hobby gone to hell anyway with WantaBee Frequency Cops like you! Get a life who cares what you think....No matter what happens to the hobby you still going to find some thing to bitch bitch about!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
Bitch Bitch Bitch
WB2WIK & His Son W4XKE ?
Who reall care about rules no one give a dam anymore about them so why worrie.This hobby gone to hell anyway with WantaBee Frequency Cops like you! Get a life who cares what you think....No matter what happens to the hobby you still going to find some thing to bitch bitch about!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
Bitch Bitch Bitch
WB2WIK & His Son W4XKE ?
Who reall care about rules no one give a dam anymore about them so why worrie.This hobby gone to hell anyway with WantaBee Frequency Cops like you! Get a life who cares what you think....No matter what happens to the hobby you still going to find some thing to bitch bitch about!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
Bitch Bitch Bitch
WB2WIK & His Son W4XKE ?
Who reall care about rules no one give a dam anymore about them so why worrie.This hobby gone to hell anyway with WantaBee Frequency Cops like you! Get a life who cares what you think....No matter what happens to the hobby you still going to find some thing to bitch bitch about!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
WantaBee Freq-Cops
W4XKE sir you act and sound like some of the assHole hams we have here local,I contact a couple friends in Cumberland County and they know you real well.Learn alot from them about you....Glad your in Cumberland County dont need your like here!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
End Of Flame War
Now i want to read more about the one that like and dont like Code,This is really getting GOOD....... CW ALL THE WAY!!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
No Problem Here
I was not even a VE when all this happen came out,And yes i talk to Bart at the VE Desk about this crap too.So i dont have a problem do you,I do know two ham here local that one pass he extra class upgrade and his wife got her no code tech license and the test was rig,That came streight from his kinfolk that was a VE at the time and the fcc and VE Desk would not do a DAMM thing about it.So there you go Sir...In Tennessee its who you suck not what you know!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-11
Can't top that
>N2BR wrote:
No Problem Here
I was not even a VE when all this happen came out,And yes i talk to Bart at the VE Desk about this crap too.So i dont have a problem do you,I do know two ham here local that one pass he extra class upgrade and his wife got her no code tech license and the test was rig,That came streight from his kinfolk that was a VE at the time and the fcc and VE Desk would not do a DAMM thing about it.So there you go Sir...In Tennessee its who you suck not what you know!
Posted by N2BR on August 11, 2005<
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-11
A better poll would be to figure out what percentage of those in favor of this proposal already have element 1 (or the older code requirements). Ask yourselves, do you think eliminating code is good for the ham community, or are you just hoping your next upgrade won't need to include element 1?
Posted by
KB1FWN on 2005-08-11
cw
I think most of the changes haven't done a thing for ham radio. Yes I liked the old CW requirments better. I liked testing before the FCC better than the VC's. I think it was better when we didn't have the question pools I liked the Novice licensed. Guess what all these things are gone and won't be back. Ham radio has survived. I think the elemination of the CW requirement is a done deal. I think they are just going through the motions. No matter how much we cry it is gone. Ham radio will survive.
Terry
WB4QNG
Posted by
WB4QNG on 2005-08-11
code requirements
I see no need to require the code portion in getting a ham ticket.This requirement is holding back many new people from getting into ham radio. I think we need all the new operaters we can get. I want to talk to a person . Code is fine if you want to use it, but as a requirement, I don't think so. This is 2005 not 1900. Lets get up with the times.We allow computers and all the other up date things. Forget code
Posted by
DAR1232 on 2005-08-11
CW
Go the way of Canada, do away with morse code. Many other modes in radio, why should one keep an operator off of slected bands. Share the airwaves.
Posted by
VE8AA on 2005-08-10
I'm sick of this!!
Make CW testing go away...please! These arguments are old and boring.
Why not test the old guys on using a computer? Computers are more into ham radio today than CW so let's make sure everyone knows the ins and outs of Windoz and Linux. That makes more sense to me than a CW test. Don't get me wrong, I use CW and passed the test at 13WPM. But times have changed and so must ham radio. Get rid of the CW requirement. It won't be the end of the world as some predict. It will be fine. Do not be afraid.
Posted by
WB8NUT on 2005-08-10
I just love the argument people bring up saying "well since CW isn't the only mode and I mode I don't want to use it shouldn't be on the test". Think about it, that argument is not a good one. Now that CW will be removed I propose we take RTTY, Packet, questions about TNCS, MARK/SPACE, baud rate, PSK31 and all other digital modes off the license. After all I have no desire to use rtty, rtty is rarely ever used (I hear at least 30 CW QSO's to 1 RTTY).
Heck lets just end the entire testing process. Send in $25 and an application and be done with it.....(I'm joking of course!)
CW The Original Digital
George - KI4FIA
http://www.MilAirComms.com
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-10
Coincidence ???
Is it a coincidence that this poll seems divided about the same way that the country is politically divided? Hmmmmm
Posted by
WQ6F on 2005-08-10
Coincidence ???
Is it a coincidence that this poll seems divided about the same way that the country is politically divided? Hmmmmm
Posted by
WQ6F on 2005-08-10
The world will still go on.
Two years after the requirement goes you will wonder what the fuss was all about. The UK and most of Europe ditched the CW requirement and the sky did not fall in. Operating standards did not deteriorate (unfortunately they did not get better either), interest in the hobby has increased (at least in this part of the world). Paradoxically interest in CW has not declined with the RSGB now organising CW proficiency ‘tests’ for those wanting it
I never understood why having passed the old 12WPM CW test in 1991 I suddenly became a better, more proficient operator than I was for the 9 years I was on the air (Class B VHF only) prior to sitting the test. Time the ‘good ol’ USA’ joined the 21st century.
73
Len GM0ONX (ex GM6JIC)
Posted by
GM0ONX on 2005-08-10
The world will still go on.
Two years after the requirement goes you will wonder what the fuss was all about. The UK and most of Europe ditched the CW requirement and the sky did not fall in. Operating standards did not deteriorate (unfortunately they did not get better either), interest in the hobby has increased (at least in this part of the world). Paradoxically interest in CW has not declined with the RSGB now organising CW proficiency ‘tests’ for those wanting it
I never understood why having passed the old 12WPM CW test in 1991 I suddenly became a better, more proficient operator than I was for the 9 years I was on the air (Class B VHF only) prior to sitting the test. Time the ‘good ol’ USA’ joined the 21st century.
73
Len GM0ONX (ex GM6JIC)
Posted by
GM0ONX on 2005-08-10
Code by Ear
KI4FIA said, "Now that CW will be removed I propose we take RTTY, Packet, questions about TNCS, MARK/SPACE, baud rate, PSK31 and all other digital modes off the license."
No, let's just make all prospective new hams decode 5 minutes of RTTY and PSK-31 by ear, without the aid of any electronic apparatus.
Posted by
W4XKE on 2005-08-10
The Free Riders.... Gimme Gimme Gimme... Dont want to work for it.
I feel we should not only retain Morse testing, but up the speed ...... At least 25 wpm for Extra, 15 for General, and bring back the Novice Class with its 5 wpm beginners speed!!! Just ask anyone who achieved their Novice license about their first contact!!! It is usually the highlight of their Ham Radio experience. By the way, we were never forced to learn CW, we wanted to learn it and were pround when we did !!!! Anyone that would remove CW from Ham Radio is spitting in the face of a fine tradition that was the real basis for Ham Radio. The "Old Man" would roll over in his grave on this one. Anyone that wanted to be a Ham knew that CW was the beginning of the most rewarding hobby they would ever know. Ham Radio was once a very respected Hobby that often led to lifelong careers in Electronics. This is no longer the case. The tests are no longer tests, they are a small excercise in memorizing. It used to be called Cheating when you got hold of the exact questions and answers to a test. This was not too many years ago, no longer !!! The tests are a pitiful excuse. They have contributed to the Dumbing Down of Ham Radio. The beginning of the end started with the VE program and has gone downhill ever since. The no code Tech license was nothing but a slap in the face. You give an inch, they take a Mile, and here we are. Somehow, a few people think they are entitled to a Ham License, and should not have to earn it. If this is the way you feel, then you have no idea what Ham Radio is all about, and I truly feel sorry for you. Another Thing, I keep hearing "CW is just another mode", and should not be part of the test. That is hogwash! If you take a class in French, shouldnt you speak French, German speak German, and so on. CW is the basic language for Ham Radio. It is Not just another mode ! All in all, we should be adding to our knowledge, not taking away.
Posted by
W5AU on 2005-08-10
Get an antenna
>code vs no code..??
How would you feel if the FCC issued a NPRM that all Amateurs were to be required to learn Latin to be allowed on the HF bands, JUST BECAUSE a few who had learned it in the "old days" wish to converse in latin "some times " on HF..Think about it fairly!!<
::I did. What's Latin have to do with ham radio? If the FCC created this requirement, however, I'd be all for it, and I'd learn Latin. I don't think they would, because it's irrelevant, and they'd have to actually care about ham radio; it's very evident they don't.
>The bands are not here only for the enjoyment of a FEW! They are here to train a useable group of communicators and allow for experimentation not exclusion.<
::It's not a few. CW as a mode is second only to SSB in global popularity, and in many countries is first. Check the stats. Check the contest results. Regarding training a usable group of communicators, when was the last time you participated in training anybody? This hobby has always been self-trained and anyone who wants training must seek it out for himself, because it's certainly not going to go find him.
>Have you tuned to the CW subbands lately?? Strangely quiet and its not my rig it will talk overseas easily.<
::Your rig "will talk overseas?" More CB lingo...rats. There's more CW activity than phone activity on most of the HF bands these days due to dwindling conditions. Between 0100 and 0230 UTC yesterday, on 20 meters I logged 119 CW contacts in process, vs. 88 SSB contacts. There were 4 SSTV QSOs in process, and 18 or 19 digital. Most of the DX was on CW. Post of observation: My home station in Los Angeles. 20m antenna: 6 element 5-band beam at 55 feet. I think the vast majority of active 20 meter DXers would agree with my observation.
::But, this issue has nothing to do with "CW." It has to do with the demonstration of a low level of proficiency as the only actual proficiency test remaining in the amateur radio licensing process. There isn't any other one. I'd be just as happy to replace it with a demonstrated ability to work 10 stations inside of 120 seconds, getting all the exchange data correctly without having to request any repeats, using "phone." That would weed out far more prospective licensees than a code test ever did, and would be great fun to observe.
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-10
NO MORSE
It has worked very well in the UK so don't knock it, chaps. Give it a go.
Posted by
G1YGJ on 2005-08-10
To Be or Could BE!
I think its very funny that most of the comments to do away with code,Are the ones that had the test give to them,I bet they had to have a real Ham or CBer to come and put up there antenna or show them how to use the radio and program there 2bit 2 meter radio for them.I think its bad when a new ham get on the repeater and says WHAT CHANNEL is This! WHATS A POWER SUPPLY! I ONLY READ THE CORRECT ANSWERSTO PASS THE TEST! WOW YOU MEAN MY RADIO IS GETTING OUT THAT FAR! I HATE CODE EVEN THO I NEVER HEAR OF IT! WHAT DOES A REPEATER DO ? AND WHATS A REPEATER! MY BEST FRIENDS ARE VEC AND THEY HELP ME GET MY LICENSE!.......And to the CB Radio Bashers.....Hell Dude 95% of all ham's came from CB Radio Bands,And have more know how than most ham's i have met.....just my dollar...
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-10
Every 3rd word is 4 Letters
N2BR said: "Hell Dude 95% of all ham's came from CB Radio Bands."
It is unfortunate that so many licensed operators wouldn't be able to talk if they couldn't cuss (on the air and off). So much for letting your kids listen to your radio.
Posted by
W4XKE on 2005-08-10
Every 3rd word is 4 Letters
N2BR said: "Hell Dude 95% of all ham's came from CB Radio Bands."
It is unfortunate that so many licensed operators wouldn't be able to talk if they couldn't cuss (on the air and off). So much for letting your kids listen to your radio.
Posted by
W4XKE on 2005-08-10
"For" or "Against" is the question.
I just hope people aren't confusing thier answers with the issues at hand.
ie.
Are you "for" the Morse Code Requirement?
Are you "for" the current proposal ?
You get the drift.
Posted by
KC8VWM on 2005-08-10
To Be or Could BE !
W4XKE There more that goes on TV that kids see and hear than Amateur Radio!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-10
Decency on Amateur Radio?
N2BR said: "There more that goes on TV that kids see and hear than Amateur Radio!"
Then by your comment, you are defending cussing on the amateur radio bands? Some of us still try to maintain a bit of decency, particularly within earshot of our families and for the respect of other radio operators and their families. Like I said, this is unfortunate. Old Hiram Maxim would not be impressed if he were around to witness your new code of ethics.
Posted by
W4XKE on 2005-08-10
I don't think so
>N2BR wrote: To Be or Could BE!
Hell Dude 95% of all ham's came from CB Radio Bands,And have more know how than most ham's i have met.....<
::You've been hanging around the wrong places. Most of the hams I know and have met have never been involved in CB radio (including myself -- I've never transmitted a signal on CB, although I've heard it), and the majority of "converts" from CB I've worked and met demonstrate substantial evidence of their background. If they can shape up, I forgive them. If not, I ignore them. A lot of the converts seem to be on six meter SSB, and I try really hard not to work them because I lack the patience to tell them to turn their mike gains down, stop using silly phrases and accents...
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-10
Invert this concept
KI4FIA said, "Now that CW will be removed I propose we take RTTY, Packet, questions about TNCS, MARK/SPACE, baud rate, PSK31 and all other digital modes off the license."
========
Actually, lets invert this concept and say we need more questions on RTTY, Packet, TNCs, Baud Rate, PSK31. etc. AND CW on the test. We don't have to operate any of the modes BUT we have to understand the how and why of them!
Dennis KG4RUL
Posted by
KG4RUL on 2005-08-10
CW & CUSSING :(
Fortunately I have never heard anyone cussing on the air in the U.K. or here in Hawaii. I have heard one or two ' frequency hog punch up's 'occur on QSO's from the Mainland on 20m but never on CW.
KH6/G3SEA
Posted by
G3SEA on 2005-08-10
Need New Hobby
I personally think that REM's "It's the end of the world (ham radio) as we know it" with a few words changed around is appropriate in this situation. If the CW requirment is dropped then I'll sell my gear and put the money into a new hobby. Hmmmm.....R/C Airplanes sounds like a good idea???....Maybe I'll just go to CB (i have heard more people who know radio on 11 than on VHF/UHF lately). Just something to think about.
73
Andy KC2GOW
CODED EXTRA
AVID CW OP.
Posted by
KC2GOW on 2005-08-10
No code for me, thanks
First, I have no problem with those who wish to learn and use code. More power to them as far as I am concerned.
For myself, learning code just to upgrade my license is simply a waste of my time. Why? I don't like code and won't use it.
For all the doom and gloom predicted by the "die hard" code users, I don't buy it. There are many responsible and technically proficent people like myself who don't want to "mess" with code. I resent those who would judge my skill and expertise by my refusing to learn code. The day the requirement ceases to exist, I will upgrading my license.
The preceding has been my $.02 worth. Please excuse me now while I run like hell for cover. LOL :-)
Tim
Posted by
KB9ROF on 2005-08-10
The Passing of a Code
I have been reading the comments on the pending proposal and in general it seems to be a selfish type of comment, an "I've got mine" club comment, or an attack on someone for not expressing themselves with great writing skills. I usually don't enter into discussions but I want to express my opinion on this one.
I could tell my story about way back when or I like or dislike Morse Code because of... but that would be like many of the postings.
Since the global community has become so small and especially in amateur radio with all the high dollar amplifiers and antennas that we need to look at being good neighbors. What is the licensing requirements in other countries that have many operators? How will they react to the change if it happens? Will they quit answering anyone from the US since our requirements may be to much different than theirs? They may still have pride in earning a license and building their own equipment. Review some of the comments on your DX QSL cards and consider the position of hams in the other countries.
Long story short is that we need to fit in globally with some respect. Many of the other cultures in the world view things much differently than we do in the US. If most countries do not require Morse Code then so be it and maybe a reduction in requirements would work. If most do require Morse Code then keep most of the requirements. We need to fit in the global picture.
Posted by
WB9ENB on 2005-08-10
KB9ROF Said: "I don't like code and won't use it."
If you never learned the code then how do you know you don't like it?
You're missing a great group of operators on CW. You're missing a great chance to catch some rare DX on CW (many countries have more CW ops then SSB ops). You're missing a great chance to work VHF and UHF DX (yes, CW is still being used on VHF, I know, I work it!)
George - KI4FIA - A new ham who realized the Value of CW! Oh I'm only 40 years told...
CW - The Original Digital!
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-10
KB9ROF Said: "I don't like code and won't use it."
If you never learned the code then how do you know you don't like it?
You're missing a great group of operators on CW. You're missing a great chance to catch some rare DX on CW (many countries have more CW ops then SSB ops). You're missing a great chance to work VHF and UHF DX (yes, CW is still being used on VHF, I know, I work it!)
George - KI4FIA - A new ham who realized the Value of CW! Oh I'm only 40 years told...
CW - The Original Digital!
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-10
i agree
as what is known as a no code tech i do use cw on vhf and uhf and plenty of code therejeff/n3jbh
Posted by
N3JBH on 2005-08-10
Stiring the pot!
I personally don't care if they do away with or keep code. However I am very happy that they are NOT going to do automatic upgrades like the ARRL proposed. CW is enjoyed my many people, and will continued to be enjoyed by them. Learning cw was a TEST, to see if you really wanted your license. If they do away with it, so be it, but I think there should be some sort of another test to take its place, maybe more technical questions, electronic formulas etc. The problem with our society today is the "gimmie, gimmie" group that think they are intitled.
No one is intitled to be an Amateur Radio operator...always remember its a "Privledge!!" After 40+ years of playing radio, I still feel PRIVLEDGED!!
PS - for those of you who think because the rest of the world has done away with , that we should...go out and do a little research on the RESTRICTIONS these countries have! Just a little food for thought.
Not only should you feel PRIVLEDGED to be a HAM, always remember..
"It not the class of license the Amateur holds, BUT the class of the Amateur that holds the license!"
73..and lets go play RADIO!!!!!!!
Posted by
W4LGH on 2005-08-10
NO CODE EXTRA CLASS
NO CODE TOMORROW, NO WRITTEN EXAM NEXT !!
HELLLLLO CB'ERS
Posted by
K0IJ on 2005-08-10
Drop the cw requirement
It is time to drop the cw requirement. these days it is hurting ham radio not enhancing it.
Posted by
W8JJI on 2005-08-10
Eliminate Question pool
The FCC wants to eliminate CW than why not throw out the Question pool and go back to the old school and let the applicants study the manuals and test from fcc generated tests. Sounds fair to me.
Posted by
WD2I on 2005-08-10
Code
It's a no brainer, No Code, will lead to No testing. No Testing will eventualy be the downfall of Amateur Radio as "HAMS" know and love. If you want communication without code, just set up Echo Link and talk away. Seems like everyone cant leave well enough alone. I personally feel to know code was always a step above those that knew nothing about it. Code is simply a part of old radio communications. Those that do not know or apply code, are in the same boat as most newer radio members, just an appliance operator, nothing more. Guess I'm glad to be the step above the rest!
Posted by
W8DMC on 2005-08-10
Against, but optimistic.
I am against the proposal. But I have no control. I am optimistic that we can continue to train people, and continue this great hobby/service.
Posted by
KD5OWO on 2005-08-10
cw with extra
I would like to see cw added to the extra test and I say that because it should not be taken away altogether. I think the FCC has it right to let people get on HF with a General it will let many good hams that don't have the ability to learn code for what ever reasons a chance to stay on the air.
If tradition is the issue then make it part of the extra. If you want to reach higher take the code with the extra.It should not be eliminated all together for those reasons but think of all the new blood we can have if a General gets HF.And with today's technology with Echo link and the rest it is time for change.
Sure if you already have your code you may feel ripped off but if more people join our ranks the better our hobby.The rest of the world will be getting on without the code let's not be left behind.
Think of this, latter on the technology gets so advaned that every computer will have ham access and what will stop people from being pirates.Then nobody will be able to police our hobby.Making it within reach keeps it legal.Think about the future not what your Dad or Grandpa had to do.
Vinny KE7EGZ
Posted by
KLEMM on 2005-08-10
cw with extra
I would like to see cw added to the extra test and I say that because it should not be taken away altogether. I think the FCC has it right to let people get on HF with a General it will let many good hams that don't have the ability to learn code for what ever reasons a chance to stay on the air.
If tradition is the issue then make it part of the extra. If you want to reach higher take the code with the extra.It should not be eliminated all together for those reasons but think of all the new blood we can have if a General gets HF.And with today's technology with Echo link and the rest it is time for change.
Sure if you already have your code you may feel ripped off but if more people join our ranks the better our hobby.The rest of the world will be getting on without the code let's not be left behind.
Think of this, latter on the technology gets so advaned that every computer will have ham access and what will stop people from being pirates.Then nobody will be able to police our hobby.Making it within reach keeps it legal.Think about the future not what your Dad or Grandpa had to do.
Vinny KE7EGZ
Posted by
KLEMM on 2005-08-10
R.E. No Code - posted by WI6I
....... It's kind of like progressive tax rates, for an example. Everybody "knows" such rates are fair, but a rational proof is impossible. The argument against no code is similar. Morse is an "obsolete" technology, and therefore must be irrelevant, just because "everybody knows" that obsolete technologies are irrelevant. ........
Posted by WI6I on August 8, 2005
=============
And similarly, NO ONE can produce a rational proof that Morse Code is relevant.
That sounds like a draw to me.
Posted by
KG4RUL on 2005-08-09
Instant Gratification
Our culture is ALL about instant gratification. If I want it I should be able to just take it now and maybe pay later. So much for amateur radio - the tradition of service is slowly dying, and the sense of achievement that many of us worked so hard to earn is now available via Visa, MasterCard, Discover, or American Express. Don't work to build anything, just buy it, whether it's a new rig, a new antenna, or a license manual containing a dumbed-down complete list of all exam questions and answers. You don't even have to learn the code - just make excuses as to why you "just can't figure it out", or why "it's just too hard to learn".
But, as said earlier, the decision is a done deal whether it's the right thing to do or not, and whether it turns the ham bands into a giant chat room or not. Now, in our zeal to "modernize" things, let's not legislate A1 out of existence just because it is old and slow.
A message to those who consider themselves as "No-Coders": You're now probably winning your campaign for getting something for nothing. But just because YOU don't like to use CW doesn't give you the right to tell others that THEY can't use CW. Remember, eventually all of us CW dino's will die off and then you can have our subbands to enlarge your chat rooms.
73, K4IQT
Posted by
K4IQT on 2005-08-09
instant gratification
do to others as they have done to you
Posted by
AG4HY on 2005-08-09
Morse Code PROBLEM SOLVED!
"Plug MFJ's CW Reader with built-in Keyer into your transceiver's phone jack and key jack. Now you're ready to compete with the world's best hi-speed CW operators- and they won't even know you just passed the code test! Sends and reads 5 - 99 WPM."
The code problem has been solved for anyone who has $179.95.
Posted by
W4XKE on 2005-08-09
CW
I've used CW off and on for nearly 60 years and I'm GLAD to see this archaic method of communicating fading into the dust. Regardless of your speed, it's slow compared to voice and can't impart real emotion or emphasis. Requiring a modern Ham to learn Morse is akin to requiring auto mechanics to learn horse shoeing. Junk CW and move on. I wasn't popular expressing this view more than 30 years ago but so what? Drop the elitism of Morse and if the truth hurts get over it.
Posted by
WB7DCV on 2005-08-09
For Sale?
FCC WANTS THE BANDS FOR OTHER THE STUFF, LIKE MONEY. SO YOU BETTER KEEP WHAT YOU HAVE.............. MOT___LA CAN'T WAIT.
N3LJS
Posted by
N3LJS on 2005-08-09
Interesting results
Interesting that after two full days and 1471 responses, 56% are still "against."
Cool.
Hope the FCC is reading this...
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-09
Code isnt the problem
I have had my fair share of QSOs on CW and SSB. When I
am on the air, I find my fellow hams to be kind,
considerate and fun to QSO. And yet these posts always
seem to speak with such poison towards fellow hams.
Take a look at the URL below and trace the history of ham
radio:
http://www.ac6v.com/history.htm
Ham radio has always had its ups and downs and
problems with testing and regs and other issues. What
counts in the end is getting on the air and being NICE to
each other and enjoying the hobby for what it is---not
what it isnt. May I suggest that respecting one's fellow
hams is the most admirable goal of ham radio.
Pete
WZ5PM
Posted by
WZ5PM on 2005-08-09
Huh???
"Interesting that after two full days and 1471 responses, 56% are still "against." "
What is so interesting? The poll is still just the hams and others who use the e-ham site--no others are counted here. It may be way different if ALL hams were polled. And it was over 60% against the other day......
Posted by
K1CJS on 2005-08-09
Why not let the techs use the old novice bands with cw or data no code test needed
Posted by
N8BOA on 2005-08-09
"archaic method of communicating fading into the dust" Now that is a statement from a Ham who doesn't do much listening.
There are always CW sigs to listen to on the bands, usually more than on SSB....tonight is no exception.
CW is still more popular...
George KI4FIA
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-09
code vs no code..??
How would you feel if the FCC issued a NPRM that all Amateurs were to be required to learn Latin to be allowed on the HF bands, JUST BECAUSE a few who had learned it in the "old days" wish to converse in latin "some times " on HF..Think about it fairly!! Would you make an effort WITHOUT COMPLAINT to learn latin? Or would you push to get the rule abolished? The bands are not here only for the enjoyment of a FEW! They are here to train a useable group of communicators and allow for experimentation not exclusion.
Have you tuned to the CW subbands lately?? Strangely quiet and its not my rig it will talk overseas easily. Think about it!! 73's Phil
Posted by
KU4AB on 2005-08-09
I'm sick of this!!
Make CW testing go away...please! These arguments are old and boring.
Why not test the old guys on using a computer? Computers are more into ham radio today than CW so let's make sure everyone knows the ins and outs of Windoz and Linux. That makes more sense to me than a CW test. Don't get me wrong, I use CW and passed the test at 13WPM. But times have changed and so must ham radio. Get rid of the CW requirement. It won't be the end of the world as some predict. It will be fine. Do not be afraid.
Posted by
WB8NUT on 2005-08-09
Elimination of Morse Code?
I believe that morse code has a purpose in both amateur and commercial radio and should not be eliminated from amateur or commercial radio exams. Example, we still use morse code in the workplace. Mainly to identify interfering base station transmitters. We also use it for tracking purposes.
73,
KC5NGX
Posted by
KC5NGX on 2005-08-09
Elimination of Morse Code?
I believe that morse code has a purpose in both amateur and commercial radio and should not be eliminated from amateur or commercial radio exams. Example, we still use morse code in the workplace. Mainly to identify interfering base station transmitters. We also use it for tracking purposes.
73,
KC5NGX
Posted by
KC5NGX on 2005-08-09
Elimination of Morse Code?
I believe that morse code has a purpose in both amateur and commercial radio and should not be eliminated from amateur or commercial radio exams. Example, we still use morse code in the workplace. Mainly to identify interfering base station transmitters. We also use it for tracking purposes.
73,
KC5NGX
Posted by
KC5NGX on 2005-08-09
KU4AB says "Have you tuned to the CW subbands lately?? Strangely quiet and its not my rig it will talk overseas easily"
Phil, first I'm surpised that a vendor would enter into such a subject, might scare away business (I was a customer)
But you might want to see what is wrong with your HF rig, your filters must be broke. Everynight I count more CW sigs than SSB sigs and again tonight was no different. Look at the ARRL stats, they even show that CW is more widely used then SSB.
I've even used your 2 meter loops on CW but I have graduated from using your loops to using stacked yagi's, your loops are "old days" Technology. Since (to my surprise) you're anti-CW I guess maybe I shouldn't use your loops, lately I've made more CW 6 mtr qso's on your 6 mtr loop than SSB' qso's. Here I thought I had a CW - approved antenna....
George - KI4FIA
http://www.MilAirComms.com
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-09
So you can still use code if you want to? It's not really a "ban" on code is it? Just not required for voice on the HF freqs. I am all for dropping the code requirement. I own a couple of HF rigs and listen to HF bands at times. Would like to try transmitting on them to see how well I have my equipment tuned.. As a "professional" electronics technician, the general test questions are easy for me and the exam is no problem. I just don't care to learn code. Since I would just use voice anyway. Not to demean morse or others that use it. I here it, and sometimes wonder whats being said. But, turn the knob a little more and there are people talking. But I can't jump in and say hello because I am not good at tapping the key.
And the worry of this leading to elimination of the ham bands. Please. There will be more users of HF than ever. Is 2 meter at risk of going away? No. And code is rarely used on that band. But it is allowed.
So this is not an end to code. Will it be lost? No. Keep it going if you want to, i think it's a cool skill.
Posted by
KD7WAX on 2005-08-09
So you can still use code if you want to? It's not really a "ban" on code is it? Just not required for voice on the HF freqs. I am all for dropping the code requirement. I own a couple of HF rigs and listen to HF bands at times. Would like to try transmitting on them to see how well I have my equipment tuned.. As a "professional" electronics technician, the general test questions are easy for me and the exam is no problem. I just don't care to learn code. Since I would just use voice anyway. Not to demean morse or others that use it. I here it, and sometimes wonder whats being said. But, turn the knob a little more and there are people talking. But I can't jump in and say hello because I am not good at tapping the key.
And the worry of this leading to elimination of the ham bands. Please. There will be more users of HF than ever. Is 2 meter at risk of going away? No. And code is rarely used on that band. But it is allowed.
So this is not an end to code. Will it be lost? No. Keep it going if you want to, i think it's a cool skill.
Posted by
KD7WAX on 2005-08-09
DBL post
And a nice double post. Sorry about that.
Posted by
KD7WAX on 2005-08-09
Code Elimination
We are our own worst enemies (Hams I mean). Look at who invented all the nifty computer programs to send and receive Morse. What has that done to one's desire to learn it the "old way"? Does a farmer still use a horse drawn plow when John Deere is setting in his garage. How many parents out there make their kids walk 10 miles to school in the snow barefooted? Hell no, you buy 'em a car to go in or tak'em yourself nowadays because it's readily available and society expects it. I have to say to the OM's out there, I respect you for what you had to do to become a ham in your generation, but in my generation we were taught not to re-invent the wheel. The software you folks created is my vehicle, and I'll be driving it just like everybody else who is and may become interested in the hobby. Drop the requirement because it's stifling smarter than average folks from being interested!!
KF4LOV No Code and Happy about it!
Posted by
KF4LOV on 2005-08-08
Code Elimination
I have been involved with two different federal agencies in years past that have gone thru deregulation/downsizeing. Both posted the proposed changes and then had a comment perion along with meetings that let people air their yae's and nay's, pro's and con's. Just as the FCC is doing now with this code elimination thing. IT'S ALL EYEWASH! The decision has been made, read it. When the comment period is over, the rule change will go into effect, PERIOD. Regardless of what YOU think.
For what it's worth... AGAINST.
KA2LIM
Posted by
KA2LIM on 2005-08-08
Keep Part of It....
Maybe open SOME of the HF bands, but keep some closed to the no-coders.
The parts of these bands could be used for any emmission type per some reasonable band plan.
David, N1ZHE
Posted by
KO1C on 2005-08-08
Keep Part of It....
Maybe open SOME of the HF bands, but keep some closed to the no-coders.
The parts of these bands could be used for any emmission type per some reasonable band plan.
David, N1ZHE
Posted by
KO1C on 2005-08-08
The hams who will call me a low-code General or a low- or no-code Extra are going to call me names regardless--all because I didn't have to pass the same tests as them.
Personally, I'm not going to continue this tradition and call the no-coders names. I think this whole argument just brings out the worst in people. It's a bureaucratic decision in which we as hams have little or no say.
So let's make the best of it and Elmer any newcomers, just as we have with new Technician class licensees. And we should also be ready to Elmer any newcomers to HF, although I don't expect the explosive growth that so many are predicting.
Give a man a fish... or give a man a pole...
You pick the future.
73 DE K9NYO
Posted by
K9NYO on 2005-08-08
The hams who will call me a low-code General or a low- or no-code Extra are going to call me names regardless--all because I didn't have to pass the same tests as them.
Personally, I'm not going to continue this tradition and call the no-coders names. I think this whole argument just brings out the worst in people. It's a bureaucratic decision in which we as hams have little or no say.
So let's make the best of it and Elmer any newcomers, just as we have with new Technician class licensees. And we should also be ready to Elmer any newcomers to HF, although I don't expect the explosive growth that so many are predicting.
Give a man a fish... or give a man a pole...
You pick the future.
73 DE K9NYO
Posted by
K9NYO on 2005-08-08
ATTITUDE
Judging from the majority vote to keep a code requirement, I think a lot of folks are realizing what the real issue is, and it's NOT CW. It's attitude. There is really no reason why a reasonably intelligent person cannot learn code at 5WPM. Those that have passed the test all know this regardless if they like and use CW or not. There are those who claim that they just can't get the hang of it, no amtter what they try. Hogwash, but non the less, a self fulfilling prophesy. Also know as SELF DEFEATING ATTITUDE. Then there are those who know that they will probably never make a CW contact, so why sould they be tested on it? This is a RESENTFUL ATTITUDE. Some may argue that the military has dropped CW, as well as several countries have from their amateur radio requirements. I guess most of these guys haven't tuned around the CW bands lately, especially during a contest. CW is very much alive and well. This is the HEAD IN THE SAND ATTITUDE. CW is not dead, nor is it dying off at a rate faster than any other facet of ham radio. The only really alarming mortality rate seemed to be in the tremendous number of no-code techs who never seemed to have gotten on the air at all. So much for the ARRLs promise to the manufacturers that millions of dollars of profit would soon be made on VHF/UHF gear. Now they get to push the same premise with more expensive radios! Hey, they're a business. They do what they gotta do. Then there are those who display a combination of some or all or the above Attitudes. Simply, BAD ATTITUDE.
Then there are those who realize that there is a dowmside to everything. If you like and want horses, you gotta learn to shovel shit. These folks buck down and learn the code because it's just something they have to do to get what they want. This is the CAN DO ATTITUDE. There are those who have learned the code in spite of tremendous disability. This is the almost superhuman I CAN DO ALMOST ANYTHING ATTITUDE. Much to be admired. Sme new candidates see CW as just another facet to the hobby; to be learned along with all of the other material on the test. The LET'S TRY IT,IT MIGHT BE FUN ATTITUDE. And believe it or not, Virginia, there are those who learn CW because they have every intention of using it. Really! The I NEED TO KNOW THIS ATTITUDE. One attitude I have never seen expressed from the pro CW group is the YOU HAVE TO LEARN IT BECAUSE I HAD TO LEARN IT ATTITUDE. That has never been a point of argument. I meet folks who have the above less that desirable attitudes in other areas of life; for the most part they are usually unhappy about something, and rarely very successful in their endevors. On the other hand, I know lots of folks with the positive attitudes mentioned. Guess what? Generally very happy and successful. What type to you want to see coming into ham radio? Hint to the ARRL...who do you think has more money to spend? Who do you think is going to be more interested in reading the diversity of articles and books you publish?
I have no problem accepting the fact that the code requirement will be lifted. Anyone who comes into the hobby after that fact I'll welcome with open arms. As for the ones with the bad attitudes just waiting around for a free handout, there's little I or anyone else can say to disuade you from taking the low road. Remember that these attitudes control your life and thinking outside of ham radio as well. Easy to recognize, easy to avoid. I don't look at you with disdain, but more with sympathy for what you're missing in life.
Posted by
N2NFG on 2005-08-08
Re: CW
From a previous post:
"OK, we have to make this fair to everybody, not just the no code flag wavers. Since the no-coders gained the right to strike out the CW portion of the test, we now have to accomodate others who feel that portions of the test are unnecessary. What about that mark and space question about rtty? Well, if you don't plan on using rtty, just strike that question from your test paper. Question about microwave frequencies? Who uses them? Hmmm, cross that one out also. And so on, so forth, until you have only answered the questions based on how YOU plan to operate."
There are also procedural/technical questions about code in the theory part of the higher class tests. Nobody advocates getting rid of them. You, pal, are comparing apples and oranges. Where is the current requirement that you have to copy an RTTY transmission to satisfy? There isn't one--never has been. Microwave? Are you asked to set up a microwave link and copy a transmission from it? No, and you never have been asked to.
CW is the only mode that has required an actual operational test. No other mode required a test and a passing grade on it to qualify for a ham ticket.
Don't compare an actual test of a mode (an apple) to the theory/technical knowledge of a mode (an orange). The only thing you end up doing is proving one thing--you're a fool who doesn't know as much as you think you do.
Posted by
K1CJS on 2005-08-08
5 ft. high and rising......
Comment has been made about the overwhelming negative responce to the question here. I've been looking at the numbers and even though the vote is clearly against the proposal now, the yes side of the slate is catching up. Yep, it may clearly be attitude, just not the type attitude you may think!
Posted by
K1CJS on 2005-08-08
CODE....
I"m not against the Code Requirement Going away, I'm Against Giving Licenses away just Because you think you might like it. Seesm you have to have ZERO Effort to aquire a License any more?. I (Mtself) had to pass the 5WPM Code to get a Novice, I had trouble with it like anyone else, BUT I knew I had to do it!.. So I guess Enough People have Wined to let this step aside also. Cant wait till the 11 Meter ops in my area get there Extra as a FIRST License, and how things might turn out?.. I'm thinking a TIME limit and Not CODE NOW!.. What if you could get a Tech. to start but can't Aquire a General for 1 Year after issue date? Then 5 More Years of ACTIVE (Provide Proof) for Extra?... This I could understand a bit more...
I had trouble with CODE, Theory, Etc. But If you want something worth having, you have to work for it!
Posted by
N8NOE on 2005-08-08
Sorta for it
In general I am ok with it and think it's time to move on in most cases where the rest of the world is going, but would have favored retaining 5wpm CW for Extra including the extra code subbands (otherwise why bother to get an extra? BTW, I have the extra).
Posted by
K0VH on 2005-08-08
Send the FCC Your Comments!
http://www.msu.edu/~volzmich/commenthelp.htm
Please follow this link for step by step instructions to file comments with the
FCC about the removal of Morse Code from licensing requirements.
Thanks,
Keith, K4KAL
Posted by
K4KAL on 2005-08-08
UNDERSTAND one thing-, make that several
OK, so I mispelled UNDERSTAND. I drink a lot and chew mushrooms. I was zonked when I wrote it etc......get over it. But out of the ten letters, I only messed up one. So that's 90% and I would pass my code test. Oh wait, many of you have never taken a code test. "L" As for hotdogs at baseball games, they are wonderful. Oh yeah, a lot of you don't go to major league games. You can't seem to understand the directions to get there. There being the most recognized skill we have to the world. Is it starting to sink in yet? Tough getting your DXCC eh? Can't work that DX'pedition. Any simple WAZ is a pipe dream..........just can't speak to people who don't speak english? Sure, trash the codes, and while your at it, your country count, awards and dignity. And if all you people can do is respond to a mispelled word, it's no wonder you DON'T GET IT-
Posted by
N0AH on 2005-08-08
No Code
Once the concept took hold that obtaining an amateur radio license is some kind of egalitarian social "right", the Morse code requirement was doomed. There is no rational argument under such circumstances to prove that ANY testing requirement is justified, simply because the root assumption is based in belief and not in fact. It's kind of like progressive tax rates, for an example. Everybody "knows" such rates are fair, but a rational proof is impossible. The argument against no code is similar. Morse is an "obsolete" technology, and therefore must be irrelevant, just because "everybody knows" that obsolete technologies are irrelevant.
Fair enough. I'm not really zealous one way or the other; we just need to understand what's happening here. The best argument I've read here to keep the requirement is that of WB2WIK, who makes the point that the Morse receiving test is the only remaining part of the testing procedure that measures operating competence (and it doesn't measure that very well).
Maybe someday we'll be able to get a Morse code endorsement to append to whatever licinsing structure emerges from all this political posturing. Who knows? Who cares?
Posted by
K5RIX on 2005-08-08
R.E. - About Time (per KG4RUL):
About Time (per KG4RUL):
"If knowledge of Morse Code is desirable as a requirement for HF operation then, it follows that knowing how to hand crank a Model T should be required for a Driver's License."
Aren't hand signals obsolete? Nobody uses them anymore. Yet I had to use them when I tested for my driver's license in the seventies. The reason they do this is so that you will know how to use hand signals should your conventional signals fail. The same is true with CW. If you need it, you will know how to use it. Keep Element 1.
73 de AG4RQ
Posted by AG4RQ on August 6, 2005
==================
Don't you just love it when someone makes your point for you! Now we can add hand signals to hand cranking a Model T as a Driver's License requirement. If you come up with any more archaic rites of passage, let me know.
Dennis KG4RUL
Posted by
KG4RUL on 2005-08-08
Morse or ?
Morse is good. RTTY is good. So are SSB, WSJT, SSTV, APRS, ...
My idea of the day is to require a real extra show of expertise for the "extra" license. Have an advanced exam element for each of the major modulation/operation modes. Require passing two or more to get to Extra. Each element gets you a shiny gold endorsement on your ticket...
5 wpm Morse might as well be zero -- it is not a practical way to communicate, except as a stepping stone to higher capability. (That was the original Novice class idea.)
73, Martin
Posted by
AA6E on 2005-08-08
Yawn & stretch, stretch & yawn
Poor horse is so dead the fourth generation flies are making their rounds.
AGAINST! For what good that will do....
-WB2WIK/6
Posted by
WB2WIK on 2005-08-08
The fear of CW
I believe that most advocates of the NoCode policy are not so much afraid of learning the code as perhaps the fear of using it. CW is very demanding of operator proficiency. Notwithstanding the other requirements, one must be proficient in sentence construction, grammar and very importantly, spelling. A mistake in spelling could possibly lead to catastrophic results in an emergency situation.
Posted by
WQ6F on 2005-08-08
CW
AS LONG AS THEY (FCC) DON'T TAKE AWAY MY CW BANDS, I HAPPY. BACK IN '79 WHEN AS I WAS STUDING TO GET INTO AMATEUR RADIO, AND OUT OF CB, IT WAS CHALLENGING. CW IS A CHALLENGE, AND EVEN TODAY AFTER ALL THESE YEARS IT'S STILL A CHALLENGE. WE NEED AMATEUR RADIO TO ME MORE CHALLENGING. WHEN YOU START GIVING THINGS, THINGS LOSE THEIR VALVE.
Posted by
KA5ITZ on 2005-08-07
God Bless You All :)
I have read so much of this debate over the past few weeks, that I thought I would share my story. I passed the 5wpm exam over 12 years ago so I could use CW on HF with the goal of being proficient enough to at least do 13 wpm and pass the General exam so that I could use the voice portion of the HF bands to talk to my Dad. He was an old school advance who disliked code and refused to use it. After 6 months or so of working CW and making lots of contacts I could hold conversations on the radio at 15+ wpm. When I went in to take my General Exam I scored 100% on the written test and failed the code. I was 28 or so at the time had been around radio all my life. I loved electronics and had also built several homebrew projects. Failing this test discouraged me so much that when I moved I never bothered to set up the station again. About the same time the Internet exploded and with it I could communicate around the world and with my dad even faster and more reliably than I could with CW. Building computers and networks satisfied my joy of working with electronics. To make a long story short, because I did not pass that exam, was not be able to talk with my dad, and was young and easily discouraged, I quit the hobby for over 10 years, almost let my license expire. About 11 months ago my dad told me that he had heard that I could be able to take the General exam without having to re-learn the code. I discovered this was true and I upgraded to General a couple of months ago missing only 3 questions on the exam, and then on Thursday of last week after putting in 30+ hours of logged time studying plus time I did not count, I passed the extra exam missing only 1 question. Now that I have full privileges, I am re-learning the code because I am interested in doing QRP work. Had I been forced to re-learn the code and pass even a 5 wpm test before taking my General exam I would have said its not worth it. I wonder how many other guys who are into electronics and who would otherwise make wonderful Amateur operators have looked at the code testing over the years and said the same thing never really giving the hobby or code a chance to show its value. I think that if we do not try and force it down their throats good operators who find a use for it will understand the value of it on their own. Also I wonder how many people would want to come into this hobby after reading the many threads about this topic the way Amateurs are being hateful to other Amateurs. I pray God will ease the tensions regarding this code-no-code topic, and lead us to behave towards each other in the true spirit of Amateur radio so we might entice others to join our ranks and not run from them.
N4RFJ
Joe Boston
www.readyforjesus.com
Posted by
N4RFJ on 2005-08-07
Get rid of it
CW had its time and it still is useful, but in this modern age of communications, it does not make sense to test on one particular mode. It is not dumbing down, it is modernizing. Get rid of the security blanket folks. CW is not a gatekeeper. There were crappy ops when the CW requirement was 20, 13 and 5. It did not stop it then, and removing CW as a requirement is not going to stop crappy operators now. Since the hams we have don't talk on the repeaters or HF anymore anyway, let's open it up to codeless ops now - maybe they'll talk and actually use the radio and the repeaters.
Posted by
W8JAS on 2005-08-07
Instant Gratification
We all have different areas we excel at and we have different physical abilities. License classes are supposed to reflect the skill and ability of the license holder. Not every driver on the road deserves or is capable of jumping the hoops to obtain a CDL, every person in the world doesn't deserve to have the tests adjusted so they can fly a commercial jet. Every person doesn't deserve to have a motorcycle endorsement either. People just need to get over the fact they don't want to work a little bit for a reward, or that they might not be capable of spelling and/or writing portions of what we now call a CW "test".
When I was 12 years old I thought CW was a lot of work, but I found radio so fasinating I put forth the work necessary to pass. I was had to copy on paper and SEND one minute solid without error a random text. That's right, no mistakes in a one minute period on transmitting or receiving.
Something a 12 year old learned in a few weeks to get an entry license was actually tougher than the highest class of license requires today, yet people whine like babies about how tough it is.
I have no problem adjusting tests so instant gratification people can get on HF, but let's not allow them full access to everything. Let's make the Extra a REAL Extra class, and not a class with more holders than advanced. Heck, the general and Extra classes are about equal in size, and the Extra is the fastest growing class.
Another thing people forget is watt for watt consumed over time from the power supply, CW is by far the most effective mode (even more power/copy effective than PSK). It cuts through noise dozens of times better than SSB, it requires minimal equipment...significantly less than digital modes.
What the USA and other "technically advanced" nations are doing is dumbing down basic skills and root knowledge that we built on. You can't hire very many people who have good work ethics today, let alone who understand basic simple concepts. I guess Amateur Radio is simply changing to reflect how self-serving and lazy our society has become. We want everything equally distributed and we want it for minimal effort.
73 Tom
Posted by
W8JI on 2005-08-07
Stop the endless argument!
The biggest reason I can see for getting rid of CW is to stop these endless, stupid arguments of Yes to CW/No to CW. Once it's gone, the argument on whether to keep it or not will be over! That's the best reason to get rid of it now. The sooner the better. Can't wait!
Posted by
WB8NUT on 2005-08-07
Here too?
Isn't there enough of this discussion on the site already--does this overdiscussed crap about the dead horse have to show up here too?
Posted by
K1CJS on 2005-08-07
CW
OK, we have to make this fair to everybody, not just the no code flag wavers. Since the no-coders gained the right to strike out the CW portion of the test, we now have to accomodate others who feel that portions of the test are unnecessary. What about that mark and space question about rtty? Well, if you don't plan on using rtty, just strike that question from your test paper. Question about microwave frequencies? Who uses them? Hmmm, cross that one out also. And so on, so forth, until you have only answered the questions based on how YOU plan to operate. Fair enough; after all,CW isn't the only useless crap on the tests. To be completely fair, you must answer at least five of the test questions, three correct will be a passing grade. Is everybody happy now?
73, Bob N2NFG
Posted by
N2NFG on 2005-08-07
CW All The WAY!!
Well i get a but kick out of reading all this on the group,You can tell the ones that want the code to go away couse they dont want to try and do better.Its a shame to hear new hams on 2 meter asking { How Do i Hookup my Radio to a Battery or Whats a Power Supply}.What channel is my local repeater on or how many channels does that hf radio have.This is what haveing all the answers in the book and no know how about themself,Or any one to elmer them about ham radio.I held several amateur no-code class with a 99% pass rate,And i am proud to say that everyone that took my class went on to upgrade to either general or extra class with the 13-20 wpm code.Within the last couple years amateur radio has gone to hell in a handbasket and i do mean HELL.With listen to the trash on 75-80 meters and the bitching on 20 and 40 meters over a net is a shame.Also the SSB bands are really full these days with ham's.Guys it either 2 meter 440mhz 220mhz 6 meters where one can talk local and enjoy a good QSO.I run echolink and yes that a dirty word to many hams,But i hate contesting the big boys with the junk toys crapping up the bands with there over driven amps and messing up the bands.Yes i enjoy code and have been a fan of CW sence 1985 when i was first license as a novice.If the FCC want to drop the code i think is a big mistake becouse the other countrys have.I gess we all need to speak and look like mexicans then becouse there swamp this country.Anyway cw or not its amateur radio,Everyone needs to get along and help the new ham's and give the a taste of cw hay they might love it,Show them psk31 or slowscan or atv and the right way of building antenna and doing stuff.If the FCC take the code out you will still hear me on cw on the hf bands,It might be in the middle of the SSB band or digital bands but i still going to work cw till i die and dont bad mouth the CBers guys,Most of the CBers i know have more smarts about building and radio then some of the wantabe hams i know....Just my Dollar.....
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-07
code elimination
I have 2 opinions on this.
Sure, go ahead. Lower the requirements! All of the nuts from the CB band that are too lazy to learn their way in will turn it into "not ready for family" junk that's not fit to listen to.
Ok, That was the first
I sat HF voice and data circuits for many years in the Navy and I can tell you this; When all else fails, CW will get the job done. CW could some day be the only reliable readable signal to make it through in an emergency. No special equipment or computers required.
Wish me luck, I may be in the last batch of folks to have to pass the CW test this fall. Man, what an honor....
Posted by
HAM2B on 2005-08-07
This poll is opposite of the comments on the FCC comments website
It is interesting to see so many people speaking against this proposal when the FCC comments site seems to be loaded with comments that are mostly FOR dropping the code.
Personally I feel that we should keep the 5wpm requirement for Extra Class tickets only.
73's de KA9KQH
Posted by
KA9KQH on 2005-08-07
To Code or Not To Code
I have mixed feelings about this. It is kind of like seeing your mother-in-law go over a 100 foot cliff in your brand new uninsured Cadillac. I have a general license and studied hard on the code. It seems to me to be a "right-of-passage". But when the code was taken off the 30mhz and above I haven't seen the trend to CB like some thought. I have several friends on 2 meters who say they just cannot seem the get hang of the code. I think the code can and may someday be very important as it once was. I would like to see some incintive to learn it. Somebody help me down off'a this stump.
Posted by
W4CPT on 2005-08-07
Here's the poll question you should have asked:
how long after the fat lady sings will hams continue to kick this dead whale down the beach on the web?
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-07
dw
MY WIFE AND SON ARE BOTH TECHS, AND QUITE A FEW FRIENDS. BUT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE CODE STILL BE REQUIRED FOR ALL HF BANDS. AT THE LEAST FOR THE EXTRA CLASS.. WHAT WOULD BE NEXT, JUST GO BUY A TICKET..WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE?
Posted by
KD5JSS on 2005-08-07
5 WPM code
Getting too many hams that just remember questions and answers...A truely interested HAM would have no problem with the 5 WPM code test.I hated to take the code test, but felt good to know that I could communicate with the key only!
Posted by
K5TAZ on 2005-08-07
Does simply knowing CW and passing the element 1 exam automatically make you an instant professional operator? Granted, it is and always will be a right of passage to all who operate in that mode regardless of FCC rules. There are many Tech's out there that look to "Elmers" for 95% of what they learn, let's standup to the responsibility and teach instead of whine.
73
Glenn
KD5NVC
Posted by
KD5NVC on 2005-08-07
No Code Operators have earned it at this point
When I first took my Novice exam back in
1992, I passed the written. I listened
nervously to the code tape, and copied what
I could. I tested and got 6 right, 4 wrong.
I had missed the test. In my disapointment
I decided to try the tech written, and I
passed. I shortly recieved my license in
the mail. I went to the local radio shack
and bought my first ever radio as a kid. A
HT-202. I started to work some local
repeaters and really began to enjoy the
hobby. Later, I tried a few other
repeaters. When they heard the N1 Call I
was asked to get off, it was not open to
NCT's. I found several incidents where
people would not respond to me, or gave me a
hard time. I had a friend, he was a Novice,
with code. When he upgraded to Tech, he got
his N1 call, and he ran into the same
descrimination that I did. And he WAS a
coded tech. He was concidering filing for a
modification with the FCC to get his novice
call back, as no one on VHF would talk to
him. In short, the descrimination has gone
away, and vanity calls have played a big
part to this. It is no longer possible to
hear a call and assume it is or is not a
codeless Technician. It is in part this
descrimination that had kept me from
upgrading. I didn't want to learn the code,
partically because I was proud to be a NCT
and that I stood up against this behavior
for the longest time. Upon learning of the
FCC proposing dropping the code last week, I
took my General and Extra written exams
today, and passed them. I did try the code
but put very little effort into it. I plan
to simply wait until the rule changes go
through and will be proud to be one of the
first codeless extras ever. And I am
prepared to face what ever treatment I get
by the die hard coders. I am a Ham with a
valid FCC license and I am here to stay.
Second though, they said no code would ruin
VHF, and it didn't. Now this is the same
battle cry for HF. No Code didn't ruin VHF
as most people feared, and it WON'T ruin HF
either, despite peoples fears and
prejudgest.
Posted by
N1LQJ on 2005-08-07
Uh-huh.
Love that extra-light comment about the **** difficulties!
But - We have to be somewhat tough to be hams. 'Somewhat' should be dedicated to the advancement of the hobby, and not to going backwards. It is always easy to do nothing, and easier to do less-than-nothing to achieve a worthless goal.
How folks so can so easily reduce their own standards (and try to do so for others) is a preview to our next step.
Posted by
AI8H on 2005-08-07
Keep the code!
I'm a tech who thinks code should stay.The proposal to drop the code has provided the motivation to study and pass it before it goes away. I dont want to be referred to as a no-code general.
Posted by
KB3LAN on 2005-08-07
Code Elimination
You know I knew this convaluted senseless argument about keeping the code would resurface..Lets go back to the 1980s when they came up with the no code tech license..Remember what you code advocates all said? Its going to turn into CB...Well the funny is I turned on the two meter rig in miami Ft lauderdale area which has an exponential amount of repeaters only to find limited activity on one of them.Where is the so called flood of CBers?...When two meters was active it was more gentleman like than any part of hf outside of 10m.This is the only country thats so adamant about hanging onto CW..Whether they do away with it or not isnt going to help or hurt the hobby in the long run.The real CB operators are going to stay on 11 meters and the real hams are going to stay where they are.Sure it will get a temporary surge with no code HF..The trouble is this wonderful invention called a PC along with an information highway has rendered amateur radio practically useless.How do tell someone that if you study real hard and learn dit dit dah dah that the boy scouts learned and then go out and spend a thousand plus on a transceiver and another 200 to 400 on antennas,and string them all over the yard and the roof of the house,maybe you can make a contact? Please I would love this question answered. I think hes going to laugh in our face and say I can buy a PC at walmart or sears for 400 dollars and I dont need a license and I dont need a mess in my back yard of wires and antennas and guaranteed I can make a contact anywhere at anytime. Thats a hell of a bill of goods to sell...We will give you less for more..Get over it the code is ancient..I would love to take an electronics test on theory and repair of tube rf amplifiers and oscillators and their principle of operation..I would love to see how many code advocates can pass that..Ill guarantee you that I can pass it and want to take that...This is what amateur radio was all about...I would love to see the day where people build their own am or ssb transmitters again.
Posted by
N8TPI on 2005-08-06
New Idea?
How about eliminating the code requirement for licensure as proposed BUT create an optional CW certification for those who desire to operate CW? Certification can be at 5, 10, 15, 20wpm or whatever. This could be attained at any future time while the license is active. This would still stimulate activity and perhaps be an even more sought after goal as it would be non-mandatory. I bet it would even create a bit of prestige to continue the tradition. Perhaps this is a better way to introduce CW after a new licensee experiences the thrill of HF communications. Link the optional "CW certification" to any of the license classes. This idea just hit me (at 4am, HI) not sure if anyone is thinking the same. 73 de K3OD...20+ wpm CW exam passer and practitioner...
Posted by
K3OD on 2005-08-06
VE status
I'm an ARRL General Class VE and the only exams I can administer are the Technician Class written and the 5 wpm CW. If they do away with the 5 wpm code, I'll be reduced to..oh no..only the Technician written exam. How boring is that? Keep the darn requirement so I'll have something to keep me busy.
No but seriously, I'm for dropping code requirement for General but keeping it for Extra.
Posted by
W5LJM on 2005-08-06
KEEP CW
Each one of us who has HF priviliges was motivated enough to learn CW and pass the test. It required effort and desire. Nothing was handed to us. At this rate the echo mikes and roger beeps will be the norm. Can I get a ten four Gud Buddy?
Posted by
KD4FUN on 2005-08-06
it's dead jim
get over it.
Posted by
AE6IP on 2005-08-06
Dropping the "Code" Requirement
A lot of old timer hams are against dropping the Morse Code Requirement, yet at the same time, these same people, and other hams are loudly bemoaning the fact that the nbumber of Hams had decreased over the past few years. I say let those who want to use Code keep it and enjoy it, and at the same time, let the rest of us who have no interest in Code enjoy the pleasure of Voice HF Amateur Radio. Drop the Code requirement and watch and see our ranks increase again.
By KD5SSQ
Posted by
KD5SSQ on 2005-08-06
Morse Requirement
Retain Morse requirement for HF access!
If one cannot learn simple 5 wpm Morse at the General level they will [never] learn 5 wpm at the Extra level. The FCC can see this problem,they can also see that retaining Morse only at the Extra level would create a Glass Ceiling and perpetuate the Morse battle for years to come! It appears that the FCC has had enough of this battle and wants to make an end to it.It would have been better to maintain that Morse is relevant for all HF access...I believe this to be a better argument than stating it is relevant only at the Extra level. To the FCC it looked like Extras were more interested in protecting their frequency [turf] than protecting and preserving Morse code! At any rate,each year it becomes more difficult to argue that Morse should be [required] for HF access. We cannot turn back the hands of time...I love the tradition of mastering Morse code as a right of passage. Sadly...the FCC is not as sentimental as we are....W8VOM
Posted by
W8VOM on 2005-08-06
CW & Amateur Radio
I Am a Cw Op & Love the mode.Whats so hard to learn CW at 5 wpm just to pass a test!If you want something in life you MUST do whatever is required inorder to GET IT.Quite frankly they need some part of the test either written and/or CW to keep all the lazy or stupid people from coming into this hobby and ruining it for all of us,as a good example listen to some of the repeaters in LA.Do I want this on 75 meters HELL NO.We also need the structure provided by the fcc because there are those amongst us who dont care what they do and/or how they operate as long as they arent caught.My 2 cent`s worth--->``The Real Ham``
Posted by
KB9YGD on 2005-08-06
N8TPI: You say it didn't turn into CB down in your area, come on up to Daytona Beach area. I'll show you some 2 mtr CB'ers, No rules, No Id's etc.....
I'm not after a high number of Hams entering the hobby, I'm after a High Number Of Quality Hams entering the hobby, there is a bid difference!
BTW I'm not an old fart, I'm 40 yrs, bn ham 1 1/2 yrs and operate 2 mtr SSB, HF Cw (98% CW), 6 mtr SSB/CW, and Satellite FM, SSB, CW.
Without CW its just CB.
George - KI4FIA
http://www.MilAirComms.com
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-06
CODE or NO CODE
First- I am only a Tech lic holder. But am very active in my County ARES/RACES group and Club activities. We are in a Mtn. area and our VHF shadows are of great concern when called out in support of SAR, disasters, etc. I once suggested that we have a ARES/RACES endorsement for any lic that openned up all bands for our use during "training" and actual useage/call-outs...yes, we have blanket use now for emergency use, but nothing for practice, etc. That suggestion died on the vine.
Now, we come to this junction in our hobby, with the issue forced by "other nations", etc. Along with the aforementioned effect of the internet et al. And, a great amount of "blending" of these two effects or operating methods due to experimentation by hams.
This "cry wolf" mentality of "CB-CB-CB is coming" makes me puke sometimes! Are the actions of the "few" lids et al going to drive the bus for us all? We all pay some form of taxes and fund Hollingsworth's salary - perhaps he will need some temporary help in his department, eh? Perhaps we, as a user group, need to do a better job of local oversight and action? Perhaps some form of rules to enable this with some "teeth" are needed? The FCC seems to expect "us" to manage our own bands to a greater extent than ever before (cira 1930's - 1960's) so why don't we?
AND, in view of post 9/11 threats...are not MORE trained operators and eyes and ears not what we need? I have done the EC course, have you?
I am for this rule change. It is time for CW to stand on it's own in this multi mode world and NOWHERE does the rule prohibit it's use. Those that want to - will, those that don't - won't. In today's "plug 'n' play" world, the use of the HF frec's is well within the technical reach of anyone and doesn't depend on knowing anything about CW OR REPAIR LEVEL solid state electronics.
The above is solely MY personal view, not that of any group I belong to or support, YMMV.
Posted by
KD7DCR on 2005-08-06
CODE or NO CODE
KD7DCR makes a good point. "First- I am only a Tech lic holder. But am very active in my County ARES/RACES group and Club activities. We are in a Mtn. area and our VHF shadows are of great concern when called out in support of SAR, disasters, etc. I once suggested that we have a ARES/RACES endorsement for any lic that openned up all bands for our use during "training" and actual useage/call-outs...yes, we have blanket use now for emergency use, but nothing for practice, etc. That suggestion died on the vine."
Although I'm opposed to eliminating Element 1 testing for General and Extra, an exception should be made for those who are EC certified. During emergencies and disasters, ARES/RACES hams who provide EC should be allowed all band privileges for that specific purpose, regardless of license class. The same should be allowed for supervised ARES/RACES training. Fact is, I don't see why such an exemption wasn't added to Part 97 a long time ago.
Posted by
AG4RQ on 2005-08-06
Code elimination
I learned the 5wpm code test. I was all gung-ho, and stayed proficent for a time. After a few medical problems, and several surgeries later, my code retention is nill. I have been thinking of renewing my interest in code. Having said that, however, I do think that those who want to learn the code will, those who don't wont. Nuff said, it all boils down to this, GET RID OF IT!!! I don't think a body should have to learn a mode that is totally antiquated. There are many more and interesting modes out there for those who are looking.
Mark
AI4HO
Posted by
KI4CRA on 2005-08-06
If CW is such an antiquated mode then howcome on most nights I hear more activity in the CW portions of the bands then I do on the phone portions?
BTW just this week CW saved me $700! For some reason my Yaesu FT-847 stopped xmitting in SSB mode. I only use the 847 for 2 mtr & 6 mtr SSB/CW & Satellite. So I switched to CW to see if it would xmit, sure enought it did transmit my series of V's de my callsign in CW. I was just about to take a trip to AES (1.5 hour drive) and buy a new rig as I very much enjoy 2 mtr CW & SSB and would need a backup rig while my 847 was being worked on.
Lucky for me (and CW) a local ham heard me on 144.200 CW and responded to me telling me it was working fine. In CW I told him what my problem was, he suggest that I try a different mike. I did and that was all the problem was so I was back in business on 2 meter SSB. So CW saved me a 3 hour round trip and $700 for a new rig.
antiquated? I think not! Seems to be more CW activity then SSB on the HF bands on most nights (and days).
George - KI4FIA
http://www.MilAirComms.com
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-06
We live in a dummy down world
Richard, K5FZ, you have made an excellent point. In this “dummy down” world that we live in, doing away with CW just fits in. No longer are we in the age where hard work is something to take pride in, i.e., studying for a test, getting the best possible grade you can, but taking the path of least resistance has become the norm. We have already dummy downed the curriculums, standards, and made exceptions in our schools because of low expectations. Just the fact that any prospective Amateur Radio candidate is unwilling to try to study and learn CW is proof that we are living in a dummy down world. Well, I see Amateur Radio as a hobby with high expectations. Having high expectations for yourself is an important part of success, and keeping CW as a requirement will help keep Amateur Radio a successful hobby.
Posted by
KS1I on 2005-08-06
Don't Dumb Down!
Minimum morse proficiency should be required because it is more than conceivable that is may be the only mode available and useful in certain emergency situations. Sort of like learning to tie knots as a boy scout - there are all sorts of fancy gizmos that are easier and more exciting to use but when pressed it sure is nice (and sometimes critical) to know how to tie a good knot! Since Ham radio is suppose to be available to serve the public in emergency and other situations, I would say morse code should still have a role and be required!
Posted by
KV4BG on 2005-08-06
God Bless You All :)
I have read so much of this debate over the past few weeks, that I thought I would share my story. I passed the 5wpm exam over 12 years ago so I could use CW on HF with the goal of being proficient enough to at least do 13 wpm and pass the General exam so that I could use the voice portion of the HF bands to talk to my Dad. He was an old school advance who disliked code and refused to use it. After 6 months or so of working CW and making lots of contacts I could hold conversations on the radio at 15+ wpm. When I went in to take my General Exam I scored 100% on the written test and failed the code. I was 28 or so at the time had been around radio all my life. I loved electronics and had also built several homebrew projects. Failing this test discouraged me so much that when I moved I never bothered to set up the station again. About the same time the Internet exploded and with it I could communicate around the world and with my dad even faster and more reliably than I could with CW. Building computers and networks satisfied my joy of working with electronics. To make a long story short, because I did not pass that exam, was not be able to talk with my dad, and was young and easily discouraged, I quit the hobby for over 10 years, almost let my license expire. About 11 months ago my dad told me that he had heard that I could be able to take the General exam without having to re-learn the code. I discovered this was true and I upgraded to General a couple of months ago missing only 3 questions on the exam, and then on Thursday of last week after putting in 30+ hours of logged time studying plus time I did not count, I passed the extra exam missing only 1 question. Now that I have full privileges, I am re-learning the code because I am interested in doing QRP work. Had I been forced to re-learn the code and pass even a 5 wpm test before taking my General exam I would have said its not worth it. I wonder how many other guys who are into electronics and who would otherwise make wonderful Amateur operators have looked at the code testing over the years and said the same thing never really giving the hobby or code a chance to show its value. I think that if we do not try and force it down their throats good operators who find a use for it will understand the value of it on their own. Also I wonder how many people would want to come into this hobby after reading the many threads about this topic the way Amateurs are being hateful to other Amateurs. I pray God will ease the tensions regarding this code-no-code topic, and lead us to behave towards each other in the true spirit of Amateur radio so we might entice others to join our ranks and not run from them.
N4RFJ
Joe Boston
www.readyforjesus.com
Posted by
N4RFJ on 2005-08-06
About Time
If knowledge of Morse Code is desirable as a requirement for HF operation then, it follows that knowing how to hand crank a Model T should be required for a Driver's License.
See how ridiculous this sounds?
I firmly believe that if there is a real need for Morse Code it will endure without bludgeoning every applicant over the head with the requirement to learn it.
I also believe that there should be EXCLUSIVE band segments for CW operation on ALL bands.
CW is a mode of operation and is no different than PSK31 or DSB or SSTV, etc.
Dennis KG4RUL
Posted by
KG4RUL on 2005-08-06
About Time (per KG4RUL):
"If knowledge of Morse Code is desirable as a requirement for HF operation then, it follows that knowing how to hand crank a Model T should be required for a Driver's License."
Aren't hand signals obsolete? Nobody uses them anymore. Yet I had to use them when I tested for my driver's license in the seventies. The reason they do this is so that you will know how to use hand signals should your conventional signals fail. The same is true with CW. If you need it, you will know how to use it. Keep Element 1.
73 de AG4RQ
Posted by
AG4RQ on 2005-08-06
Joe Boston, I find it hard to believe that if you were good at 15+ WPM CW you failed the test. Next, if you really were good at 15+ WPM and failed the test you must not have really wanted that bad to not re-test.
Once you learn the code you never have to re-learn it. I first learned CW to where I could copy at about 10 WPM in 1976 while in HighSchool. However I didn't want the ham license bad enough because I never took the test. Then in spring of 2004 I decided I did want it bad enough. Took my a whole 2 days to "relearn" the CW to the point where I aced the 5WPM CW test. Today 99% of my HF QSO's are CW. 50% of my Satellit QSO's are CW (Oscar 29) and even worked two countries on 2 meter CW.
Point is this, once you learn CW and even if you don't use it for many years you don't have to "relearn it" as you put it.
Sorry I'm not buying your story even though you're wearing your religion on your shoulder.
George - KI4FIA
http://www.MilAirComms.com
Without CW it is Just CB.
Posted by
KI4FIA on 2005-08-06
6 years to learn -E I S H T M O A N another6 to learn 8 more
By then I ll be 6 feet under some of us have tried to learn the code(I am still trying to learn it as I type this) BUT if the code gets dropped how do you know it will become C.B band? I can lay out a few call signs on HF in fact on 14mhz I have heard worse then I ever heard on C.B(I used to drive truck cross country)See I feel that the code is used as a screening test to keep new hams from entering the HF club,Older hams I DO NOT DISRESPECT YOU in fact I try to learn from you new hams just like the new kid on the block need to learn from the older.
The code issue bla bla i ll still learn it maybe when I am to old and tired to use it.Also I have hear cw sent at over 48wpm and my digital mode wont reconize it that tells me computers are being used to send and recieve the code how nice lets have a 5wpm test and use a computer to send and recieve code (waste of time and effort)
In general I am a tech wanting to become a general but as I see it it will NEVER happen reason I CANNOT learn the code if its not in a book I cant learn it learning by sound is harder for some of us PLEASE give it some thought.
Thank You
P.S Let the flaming on me begin
Posted by
KB3DMY on 2005-08-06
I just want to know...
If I am to follow the logic of a lot of fellows here, why am I required to learn about PSK31 and SSTV and satellite operations that I have absolutely no intention of ever using? Should we eliminate that too? Or maybe we should eliminate all of that theory that appears on the exam, since I don't use most of that, either?
Or maybe the testing requires you to be reasonably proficient in all areas of amateur radio, not just the areas you happen to like.
Posted by
KA9INV on 2005-08-05
CW Testing elimination
It's about time they moved into the new millenium. You code freaks can still operate all you want. Allowing a few techs access to the phone portion of the HF bands will only be a good choice. You still have to complete a general written to upgrade. Besides, HF gear is still expensive, and this alone will limit the amount of newbies that will supposedly flood the bands. All in all, I think it's a good decision.
Posted by
KD7EZE on 2005-08-05
HELP! THe sky is falling! The sky is falling!
Funny thing, this is what was said when the 13 & 20 wpm CW requirement was dropped. And yet the sky did not fall....
Posted by
WB2GOF on 2005-08-05
2 classes of licensing!
I've been a licensed Ham for over 25 years. I feel there should be 2 classes of Amateur licensing like other countries have adopted or had in place. The entry, no-code, all theory Technician class, which allows for some 10m voice operation as well as full VHF and up priveleges. And the combining of all the rest of the classes with full spectrum priveleges, with a CW testing requirement of only 3 words per minute plus additional theory! This way, overcrowded band conditions (on some bands at times) would be alleviated by spreading out all HF operators over all available frequencies (while keeping CW sub-bands/slivers), which makes sense. If the tester cannot for some reason pass the simple, 3wpm CW test for his/her license upgrade, they can then be given a government coupon for $10 off their next CB radio purchase, and an autographed copy of 'Convoy' by CW McCall.
Posted by
W8KQE on 2005-08-05
Code
I think the code should be kept.I had to learn it ,you should learn it to get your way into HF.
When you went to high school,
You needed to take History class to pass
and get your diploma
Even if you felt you needed it or not to get through life,You were still required to take that course to pass.
Posted by
A9KW on 2005-08-05
Code
As one who spent almost a year to learn just to copy 20WPM of course i want to see CW testing as part of the upgrade requirement. Just about every one i've known who whined that for any number of reason's were unable to learn CW even at 5 wpm the one thing they all had in common was the lack of truly working at it. They all thought all they had to do was buy that majic tape and listen to it when ever they felt like it and Bingo they'ed learn it.
Do i think Ham Radio will go to the Dog's if CW requirement is dropped ?? "No" i do not but some thing's i feel just belong sort of a traditional type thing.All i can say is i'm glad i took the time and effort even tho i do not use CW but i did prove to my self that it was possible to learn. One last thought on all this and to me it's rather obvious in that the ARRL is policy controlled by the Radio Manufactor's and not the member's and for the last few year's all i've heard from Tech license holder's is they were not going to bother learning CW because the ARRL was going to drop it. HMmmmm i wonder where they got that idea from, well i think you guy's get the picture it is the ARRL that want's to end CW and they planted the seed along time ago.....
Posted by
FORMER_K0PD on 2005-08-05
No Code?
No code is no like no hotdog at the baseball game. Sure you can go, but why miss the essance of the game? Can you no-code advocates U-N-D-D-E-R-S-T-A-N-D now?
Posted by
N0AH on 2005-08-05
Goodbye Code Tests
I think the net effect will be pretty minimal at first. There will be an initial rush of Technicians to upgrade, but I think it will be only about 10-20% of them at most, probably much less.
The long term effect will be on new licensees. I think it will help us retain more of them by getting them on HF more quickly. It's too bad that FCC didn't go for a new entry license that would appeal to kids more.
Posted by
K0RGR on 2005-08-05
Hot Dogs?
I guess N0AH would like to see all attendees at a baseball game be required to buy and eat at least one hot dog. He has, however, identified the only real argument for keeping the code requirement: it just comes down to tradition. If tradition is a valid argument, then why aren't applicants for a driver's license required to show they can hand-crank a tin lizzie?
Posted by
K3AN on 2005-08-05
no code
Don't go to baseball games or ball games
Don't eat hotdogs
Posted by
AG4HY on 2005-08-05
No Code?
N0AH - Even those no-coders know its spelled: U-N-D-E-R-S-T-A-N-D !!!
Posted by
WB2GOF on 2005-08-05
No Code?
Which reminds me, perhaps we should also add a spelling requirement to tthe licensing exams keep out the riff-raff! How many of us would pass THAT?
Posted by
WB2GOF on 2005-08-05
Bye Bye Code
I agree with the FCC proposal. CW should be like other modes - if you like it, use it. But in todays data world, CW testing makes our hobby look obsolete. Of course there will be die-hards that cannot accept technology changes - just like with spark. Took a generation or two to end that debate.
Make the technical test tougher, or raise the bar to a higher passing score. That'll keep out the riff-raff !!
Posted by
K0IZ on 2005-08-05
Bye Bye Code
I agree with the FCC proposal. CW should be like other modes - if you like it, use it. But in todays data world, CW testing makes our hobby look obsolete. Of course there will be die-hards that cannot accept technology changes - just like with spark. Took a generation or two to end that debate.
Make the technical test tougher, or raise the bar to a higher passing score. That'll keep out the riff-raff !!
Posted by
K0IZ on 2005-08-05
Code
Lets do away with the license too. Why should we have to take a test just to talk on the airwaves? Most of you out there that are for doing away with the code is too lazy to tie your shoe much less study or just don’t appreciate the art. I once was proud to say that I was a trained Amateur radio operator. Not any more! It makes me sick that Amateur radio will be going the way of 11 meter. Oh well, who cares anyway?
Posted by
AG4NE on 2005-08-05
The code was used as a filter, to keep the uninterested people away. Anyone can learn the code - interestingly enough those people who have some sort of a learning disability quite often do very well at CW. Do we need to use it today? No, we have better modes now. If we drop the code requirement will it have an adverse effect on the bands? I doubt it, providing that we keep a rigorous written test in place.
But by dropping the code requirement and putting a more rigorous written test in place are we inadvertently discriminating towards mentally handicapped people?
Posted by
KE6PID on 2005-08-05
Code filter or SOME filter
Dropping the code is not the problem.
Dropping the effort required to get a ticket is the problem.
We keep making the written tests easier and easier, and now we are doing away with the code. The thing that has made amateur radio great in the past, is that you had to want it badly enough to work for it. Now it takes very little work. Soon it will take no work. The bands will soon be full of people who do not see the ticket as something they were willing to expend effort to get. It will hold little value to them. That is sad.
Posted by
K5FZ on 2005-08-05
Change is good.
Everyone thinks so negative. Like everyone who gets the easy way in to the HAM world are morons, jerks and A$$whol3s. It’s not true. Times are changing, and the old ways are in the past. Its about time things are being done before the Amateur world fades away to people who use Cell Phone and the internet to communicate.
Posted by
SPITFIRETN on 2005-08-05
Don't eliminate it totally
We are down to 3 classes of operators for entry levels into the hobby. As I stated in my comment to the FCC, The act of totally eliminating CW is ludicrous and needs to be rehashed. I disagree with doing away with CW in either class-General or Extra, BUT if it is to be, leave the requirement for the Extra class and simply eliminate it for the General class level. This can gives General class newcomers a chance to get a taste of HF. Maybe they'll decide that it's not for them as many General class ops have,(believe me-I know several Generals that have done this) and stay more in the VHF/UHF range. I've been a General class for a short time and I feel no urge to venture too far into HF. When I do it's just for a short QSO then I'm out o' there. So lets drop the 5 wpm for General and keep it for Extra. Give them SOMETHING a little challenging to work for in the TOP class of ham radio. They're not going to regret it later.
Posted by
W5LJM on 2005-08-05
no code or Know Code
I think it will go away, and I think that is probably a good thing. I know some will say this is the end of life as we know it and that is probably true, but change is inevitable, and we shall survive this also.
CW will not go away. It is a good mode and it will probably be more popular now that it is not required. It is an efficient mode, and will be around long after I am.
Perhaps we can make this a "real hams use code" pride thing, rather than belittle folks who dont use it. I am a 2 meter tech from 1978 and recent extra, and I do use cw occassionally but prefer ssb. This doesn't make me better or worse than any one else, I passed the test in effect when I tested, and met the requirements, end of discussion.
So to all the soon to be generals with the code requirement dropped, welcome to HF, and please ignore any bigots and fools who think this makes you a second rate ham, because it doesn't. If folks have such small minds as to find this is a quallifier, then ignore them, they aren't worth the effort.
We are all hams, and all belong to the same club, and be proud of it, amy fellow broithers and sisters in the world of radio.
73 and gud dx
tom ( now go put up a Fan Dipole)
Posted by
N6AJR on 2005-08-05
Worth it?
Dropping CW will not end amateur radio. It will end a custom and the efforts required to learn CW. However, effort without dedication means nothing. Anyone can compulsively learn and achieve many things but only for a short period of time. I suspect that a given 13 year old reading this thread now who, for whatever reasons, "wants" and "desires" to learn CW will learn it with or without it being obligatory. The elite athletes, for example, have always gone the extra mile because they wanted to; not because they had to do so. It is intrinsic and cannot be manufactured. Let the CW die but watch those who really love it live on.
Posted by
AI4IT on 2005-08-05
Drop CW Requirement
Drop CW!
It’s a GREAT IDEA! Time has come to END CW requirements. Don't get me wrong, I operate about 90% CW for most of 42 years and its a wonderful mode for dx, low noise, weak signal etc, but it is now a mode that is for **hobbyists** only and has zero commercial need or use; the world has moved beyond CW and its obsolete. The requirement to know the code should be eliminated, it's time has come.
For those who say we need it as a filter to keep the hoards of CB'ers off ham radio, I say to you "Stick in the Mud Old Farts", and “Chicken Little’s”, why not replace the CW requirement with the requirement for ALL operators to learn all BPSK code sets of a PSK31 signal and all Baudot code sets of a RTTY signal and be proficient at sending them by hand at testing time. Now how absurd would that be?
Drop CW and lets move on!
Posted by
W7AIT on 2005-08-05
code elimination
There goes the neighborhood
Posted by
N4PIQ on 2005-08-05
Code Elimination
I disagree with the FCC proposal. The main purpose of our hobby is to be able to provide communications during an emergency and CW is a key ingredient. I am not a big CW fan but the elimination of the 5 wpm requirement is not in the best interests of our hobby.
Posted by
N1TOQ on 2005-08-05
CW test elimination
Like it or not, I think it is inevitable that the CW test requirement will be removed from the test to obtain a ham radio license. It is just one of many digital modes, and it wouldn't surprise me if interest in CW increases, not decreases after the change is made.
Despite the chicken little fears, overall, it will increase interest in amateur radio and will help to draw needed new blood into the hobby.
Posted by
K4RAB on 2005-08-05
this is not progress
Those of you that think the way to improve
the amateur service is to bring in more people should think again. You could pass
out free ham tickets down on the street corner and most folks would say "no thanks".
I think like the Marines we just need a
"FEW GOOD MEN" (and women). Combine the
novice/tech/and tech plus all to tech plus.
Merge Advanced into Extras. Leave everything else as is including element 1 for Generals and Extras. Seems to me all
the folks pushing this that want more numbers just want to SELL us something and
that our FCC just doesn't get it or doesn't
care. Congress needs to turn the HF spectrum
over to the EPA
Posted by
WS4Y on 2005-08-05
Code Elimination
What NO-CODE? What is happening to this hobby? I remember studing day and night to pass the written General class code exam. I felt like I earned the classification by learning the code. Then to get on the air sending and receiving Morse at the General Class speed is such a thrill! Why take away the feeling of acomplishment by taking away the code. To me taking away Morse Code is like taking away the Ice from Ice-cream. We do not want this hobby to turn into CB and that is the unfortunate way it is headed! I looked over at my OLD Ham Clubs web page tonight and found out they have removed some Packet Digis and have removed the 1.2 gig repeater. There are other area of Ham radio to explore and that is what a Ham opperator is one that explores transmissions/radio. Don't tear it all down rebuild it. What about 10gig? What about other areas of the spectrum. We need to teach these kids what our fathers taught us about Ham radio the Elite,inventors,explorers and the rescuers!
Posted by
KC6ZNC on 2005-08-05
We don't need testing.
Let us see.
People can be good drivers without passing a written test. Parking is not really a part of driving (it is a stopped test).
Therefore, we can drop the written test and parking tests.
By looking at the enormous number of driving accidents, and tickets handed out, we can see that current driving tests don’t ensure good drivers. Therefor, we should drop the driving tests.
Bob
Posted by
X-WB1AUW on 2005-08-05
CW Requirements
I see all kinds of comments on dropping the code requirements, and others saying it's dead because there are other things that work better, well I say that's nuts !!! In a real emergency, CW Will work. One day, you may not have that computer, battery or Internet to type an E-mail over, but if you know the code at any speed, communications can be made on any radio or piece of wire. No one knows when some radio operator may need to step up to the plate. I hope they will be ready to work any mode available to communicate.
Posted by
K8BBE on 2005-08-04
Code Elimination
I would like to see CW remain as a requiremnet for extra. If not like some have said. Increase the difficulty of the written test. Get rid of the answers and make it fill in the blank. Everyone says move on like code is a bad habit, old fashioned. It works when nothing else, include digital, won't. It's still a mode of operation available to the operator. Wheter they choose to use it or not. So why shouldn't it be on the test? I have no interest in satellites, SSTV or packett. Take them off my written test then. You want the code gone, I want these ridiculous questions on things I'll never use removed!!!! That's fair.
Posted by
N0FQN on 2005-08-04
Good
Just think how much thinner the DXpedition CW pileups will be now! ;-)
Posted by
N2MR on 2005-08-04
Code Elimination
Perhaps you should have added one additional choice to your survey: Don't Care. I wonder how that would have changed the statistics.
Posted by
WA8HHH on 2005-08-04
code no code
for me, cw rocks! that is the mode i use 99% of the time... it kept me from getting my license for several years but i discovered the "coolness of morse" three years ago..
cw will survive..
Posted by
N5IVZ on 2005-08-04
Code Elimination
I have been licensed for over 55 years and believe the use of code is one of the radio skills that sets REAL RADIO HAMS apart from the rest of the low tech appliance operators. Why not leave it as a requirement for EXTRA CLASS only privillages? Besides I personally really enjoy operating CW.
Roger Moss W8UK
Posted by
W8UK on 2005-08-04
Code
I am for dropping it, except for EXTRA CLASS priviledges, with 100% accuracy required over 5 minute period (any one-minute 25-character segment) just as in the old days; not some 10 Q guess-a-test...
CW is by far NOT DEAD, even on 6M where I make most of my QSO's on CW...
Posted by
W8FR on 2005-08-04
Ham radio motto..
"Never let progress stand in the way of tradition!"
Posted by
W9RPE on 2005-08-04
Ham radio motto..
"Never let progress stand in the way of tradition!"
Posted by
W9RPE on 2005-08-04
Bully!
"BULLY" !!
as used by F.D.R
Posted by AG4HY on August 3, 2005
Wrong Roosevelt. It was Teddy that used that word not FDR.
Ken
Posted by
AE1X on 2005-08-04
Bravo!
It's about time.
Posted by
KC2FTN on 2005-08-04
Bravo!
It's about time.
Posted by
KC2FTN on 2005-08-04
code
Maybe brain surgeons shouldn't have to study any other part of the anatomy, either
but I wouldn't use one who didn't.
Posted by
K1DA on 2005-08-04
Sadly
It is time to drop the requirement....however, CW will always be my first mode choice, as it has been since 1965. Unfortunately, the CW bands are mostly vacant now! :-(
Posted by
K6SDW on 2005-08-04
Code Requirement
I agree with KK7WN about how people learn. I had to learn the code to make General. A code requirement is already a dead issue, the FCC has all but eliminated it. Others have said that new amateurs are bringing new skills to the hobby, and others say everyone should know the code to "prove" their competence. I've read the QST articles about amateurs having their licenses revoked for bad operating, abusive language and other serious abuse of their operating privileges. Where does that leave the issue of code? Knowing the code does not ensure competence, good operating practices or technical skills. What it allows is another mode of operating that has, and can be, valuable. I have no vested interest in whether the FCC requires the code or not. I do believe however that operators will utilize the code similar to any other mode of operating they deem necessary, fun and interesting. Relegating the code to the same level as AM, digital, satellite, slow scan TV, etc. will not diminish the vaule of the code. It might allow the hobby to again grow in ways we've not envisioned simply by virtue of encouraging, (vice scaring away), those that see no value in learing the code for their purposes. All that said, let the code requirement cease, fully encourage learning the code along with all other modes of interest, and let's move forward into the 21'st century and beyond. We used to be the leaders in technology innovation, (long before I was born), but now we'll become history if we're not careful.
Posted by
KC5PIY on 2005-08-04
Point System FILTER
It's time to devise a new "FILTER" to keep the lids off HF. I suggest a "POINT" system such as the driver's license testing uses. You get a speeding ticket = 2 points, You get a reckless driving citation = 10 points
Or as could be used in amateur radio:
Tune up on top of a QSO = 2 POINTS
Saying "Dam#, Hel#, Shi#, Fuc#, Pis# on the ham bands = 2 POINTS
Malicious operation to malign other stations = 5 POINTS
Etc.
Any accumulated 10 POINTS in a six-month period = suspension of license
Posting a $500 bond to have license reinstated, subject to no future violations.
Posted by
W4XKE on 2005-08-04
Let the flame wars begin!
Posted by
WB2GOF on 2005-08-04
Lids?
Quote: "It's time to devise a new "FILTER" to keep the lids off HF."
The CW 'filter' obviously didn't work, especially on 75 meters!
Posted by
SWANMAN on 2005-08-04
Give us a break!
4 threads running at the same time, on the same, identical subject.
Posted by
X-WB1AUW on 2005-08-04
Oooops!
Ooooops!
Same subject in the Strays area also.
eHam. Your code debate, all day, every where.
Posted by
X-WB1AUW on 2005-08-04
BULLY
AE1X.
Ok, i stand corrected, thank you.
BULLY any way , Great, Hooray. bon, goot
fantastic. magnificant.. fully agree, with FCC. and i had to pass a code test as required. now i can do it on my own if i really want to
ag4hy
"do to othere as you have been done unto"
Posted by
AG4HY on 2005-08-04
KEEP CW
I don't know how many of you bother to read the FCC Notice
of Violation letters that appear on the ARRL site, but over the
years, I have been keeping an unofficial poll of their
contents. Though I have read hundreds of them, it has only
been recently that I recall seeing any such letters dealing
with CW operations. And, guess what that was for? Chasing
DX on 14.020 with a general class ticket. A minor oiffense
compared with all the hundreds of others! Therefore, one
must conclude that CW is a filter for those who actually use
the mode.
Posted by
W5AK on 2005-08-04
Keep code in place
I think that if you want to open up HF to the masses, fine....just limit the frequencies they can operate on...a little bit of say 12,15,17,20 maybe 10 kc wide. Then if they want to get more, they can earn it. Oh!, yes, by the way, they should have to pass the current GENERAL written before they can get any of these priviledges. That would increase the number of people trying to learn code as well as a little more about electronics than how to use thier credit cards on line.
Posted by
KC0NYK on 2005-08-04
Dump the Code!
I respect CW operators and there ability to do it, but I have no desire to use CW. Maybe that will change, and I will be compelled to learn it. But for now open up all the bands (completely) and allow me to use my voice!
I was 17 in 1997 when I got into Ham radio and have not ever advanced only due to the CW requirements. I feel that if it is kept the way it is now, it will most likely kill the hobby to most younger people.
All things have there time LET IT GO...
Posted by
N1ZPO on 2005-08-04
Just listen to two Meters
One can listen to two meters for just a few moments to hear how it has become the CB of 2000's.... Making it easy to get a call, means it has little value. No effort to get it means no respect for it. Very Sad for the Ham Radio fraternaty...........Look for the wife telling her husband to get milk on his way home is coming soon to a Band near you!
Posted by
K6TPL on 2005-08-04
Just listen to two Meters
One can listen to two meters for just a few moments to hear how it has become the CB of 2000's.... Making it easy to get a call, means it has little value. No effort to get it means no respect for it. Very Sad for the Ham Radio fraternaty...........Look for the wife telling her husband to get milk on his way home is coming soon to a Band near you!
Posted by
K6TPL on 2005-08-04
No Code
Hi all,
We have done the same kind of thing in South Africa, giving the ZRs limited HF access.. We had a lot of complaints from those against it.
Looking back at it now, it was probebly the best thing that happened to amateur radio in South Africa.
Many ZRs do CW now.
CW is still one of the ways to get a ZS callsign, Getting a 100 QSOs confirmed is another way (Please Confirm any QSO with a ZR with a QSL, if possible, thank you).
73
Johan ZR1AEZ
Worcester - South Africa
Posted by
ZR1AEZ on 2005-08-04
No Code
Hi all,
We have done the same kind of thing in South Africa, giving the ZRs limited HF access.. We had a lot of complaints from those against it.
Looking back at it now, it was probebly the best thing that happened to amateur radio in South Africa.
Many ZRs do CW now.
CW is still one of the ways to get a ZS callsign, Getting a 100 QSOs confirmed is another way (Please Confirm any QSO with a ZR with a QSL, if possible, thank you).
73
Johan ZR1AEZ
Worcester - South Africa
Posted by
ZR1AEZ on 2005-08-04
No Code
Hi all,
We have done the same kind of thing in South Africa, giving the ZRs limited HF access.. We had a lot of complaints from those against it.
Looking back at it now, it was probebly the best thing that happened to amateur radio in South Africa.
Many ZRs do CW now.
CW is still one of the ways to get a ZS callsign, Getting a 100 QSOs confirmed is another way (Please Confirm any QSO with a ZR with a QSL, if possible, thank you).
73
Johan ZR1AEZ
Worcester - South Africa
Posted by
ZR1AEZ on 2005-08-04
Code elimination
I have no problem with dropping the code requirement for access to the voice segments of the HF bands, but I still think there should be a code test in order to use the CW subbands, it just makes sense. You don't even need to attach it to a certain class of license, just make an endorsement option to all classes.
This is the beginning of the end for CW as I see it. Since not many new Hams will ever learn the code, the CW subbands will shrink as Digital modes take over, probably ending up being 30 KHZ at the low of each HF band. Not that it isn't unofficially that way now.. on most bands you only have about 60KHZ on pure CW only space.
Posted by
WV2N on 2005-08-03
Code Gone
I can see that the need for morse code is going away but it is still the most reliable means of communication during the low side of the solar cycle. Although I do not want to see it eliminated I can understand why. I do not agree that testing should be used to allow the use of code on the sub-bands too hard to track an expense the FCC will not allow oh well good bye old friend hello PSK and other digital modes
Posted by
AE4NR on 2005-08-03
Not so
I've been licensed in Denmark for 1½ now. I got my license just after Denmark dropped the code requirement, and I am happy to be able to get on HF without the "useless" 5WPM test. I am now learning CW meanwhile using the Koch method. I'am actually happy that I didn't use time on 5WPM "just to pass" because now I am not in a "hurry to get the license". I can operate and meanwhile learn CW the RIGHT way. I am enjoying SSB and digimodes, and I KNOW that I am missing a lot of fun until I am ready to get into a CW QSO.
We also have a young new HAM here in our club in Copenhagen. He does the same. Get the license and THEN learn CW the RIGHT way.
73 de
Michael
OZ8AGB
Posted by
OZ8AGB on 2005-08-03
code elimination
"BULLY" !!
as used by F.D.R
Posted by
AG4HY on 2005-08-03
CW SUBBANDS
I THINK NOW THAT THE FCC HAS JOINED THE REST OF THE WORLD, WE SHOULD CUT THE CW SUBBANDS TO 50 MHZ AND USE THE REST OF THE SUBBANDS FOR DIGITAL. IT IS TIME TO USE THE NEW STUFF AND GET HAM RADIO UPDATED. WE MIGHT JUST MAKE IT A HOBBY AGAIN AND NOT JUST A BUNCH OF CONTESTERS. JUST MY 2 CENTS WORTH.
Posted by
former_W3BL on 2005-08-03
Anachronistic
I did it, but don't use it. Digital modes have made Morse Code unnecessary and frankly it is becoming an anachronism. Beef up the technical portion of the exam and make hams learn to repair their own gear and you might just see a better crop of operators out there. We don't use spark gap any more either so let's get on with things.
Posted by
W8VKD on 2005-08-03
No Code? Yawn!
I am an Extra class operator - and I got my Extra ticket just before the last time the FCC reduced the requirements. Before that I as a Tech, or what they came to call "Tech Plus", but actually more like a Tech Plus Plus because I was a Tech grandfathered for both code and the general class written. (I'm sure there are a few folks around here old enough to remember when the Tech and General licenses took the same written exam.)
I'm not an "Old Timer" by old timer standards, but I have been around long enough to have renewed my ticket a few times. And I've been around long enough to have watched amateur radio survive SEVERAL different changes each of which was "going to be the death of amateur radio" -- and I have not seen any of those changes do any real harm (a few actually did some good -- including the no-code-tech)
The point is that the vast majority of hams today not only don't operate CW but can't operate CW -- either they've forgotten what code they once learned or their ears just aren't up to it any more (both apply to me).
Anyone who thinks the Morse code requirement has been keeping out the bad apples just needs to tune across the HF bands for a while to see that there are plenty of bad apples who passed 13 and even 20wpm code tests.
Posted by
N4AOF on 2005-08-03
Can You Say Morse Code
Well that ok i gess if they want to drop the code,I think its wrong and not going to help amateur radio any.But i dont make the big money they do and do nothing.Maby with them droping the code then soon if the sameone complain,There want be anymore testing to get a ham license.Just think might be nice NO CODE NO TESTING NO VANITY CALL FEE NO FCC NO ARRL.Hummm might be good after all!
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-03
Eliminating CW
According to the current results in this survey, the greatest preponderance of respondants have voted against the FCC proposal. However, according to the FCC, the greatest preponderance of respondance that actually made comments have voted for eliminating CW.
If you are serious about commenting against the proposal, send your comments where they count -- to the FCC.
Posted by
W5USN on 2005-08-03
CW
Hey, I just got this great idea: Let's have a big discussion/argument over whether or not to eliminate the test for the International Radiotelegraph Code*! I bet this has never been done before!
*The REAL name for the "code."
Posted by
K5UJ on 2005-08-03
Coils And Bologna
I will sit in my basement shack.
By the light of a candle I will eat bologna sandwiches.
I will sit there and wind coils of copper wire on toilet tissue tubes.
I will calculate beta-p while I contemplate the elimination of CW as a testing requirement.
I will then resume grinding crystals with glass plates and Ajax powder.
Posted by
WPE9JRL on 2005-08-03
The FCC's mind is made up...
I'm against removing the test element, but discussing it here, is a total waste of time.
Posted by
KB4QLZ on 2005-08-03
Keep it for Extra
CW is a simple and effective mode of communications (and I also thoroughly enjoy it - it is my favorite mode). But unlike other modes, a fair amount of time is required in order to learn and effectively use it.
Most people will not learn anything they don't have to. I certainly wouldn't have learned Morse Code it I didn't have to. So why not keep 5wpm for the Extra in order to introduce folks to Morse Code? General Class licensees will still have the majority of HF frequencies available to them, so people won't suffer substantially if they stop there.
Phil - AD5X
Posted by
AD5X on 2005-08-03
Code Elimination
The elimination of CW is the first step in the FCC getting rid of Amateur Radio all together. What is the next step…get rid of the electrical theory, rules and regulations?! No one has come up with the $1,000 dollar answer to why CW is still a viable communication mode. CW should continue to be required because of the simplicity of the communication mode. When you are in an emergency when supply power is limited, CW will always out perform, both in power efficiency and communication ability. Digital mode DOES NOT make CW archaic and unnecessary. You have to have something to interpret the digital signal to make it usable which takes more supply power to support such a setup. The interpretation of CW is in one’s mind, making it much more efficient than any digital mode currently present. When nothing else can get through, CW will with much less sophistication and power requirements. Why can’t anyone see the benefit of the use of CW?
Posted by
KG5IC on 2005-08-03
Here but not gone.
I am learning CW out of need, not because its currently requierd. It really is no longer the most efficient mode with low band conditions. Nor is it the most efficient. It is here and handy for given applications like V/UHF weak signal work. Makes no difference to me I will learn anyway. But the debate at this point is moot. In reality the deciaion has been made by the FCC and the rest of the free world.
Posted by
N2WEC on 2005-08-03
Code Elimination
I agree with the FCC proposal , the talk that eliminating the code will hurt or point the way to the end of amateur radio is not true what the FCC is doing is removing the test requirement not the code , code is a mode off operation as it Rtty, PSK, Digital
and other modes ,i think by eliminating the requirement for code testing will help Ham
Radio, as far as dumbing down and turening ham into CB that will only happen if there is no self Policing of the Amateeur bands by amateurs Rich KE7ELT
Posted by
KE7ELT on 2005-08-03
Ever notice that most (but not all) people in favor of dumping the code are those that have never passed the code? In short, people with something to gain?
Posted by
W9WHE-II on 2005-08-03
Time For The Test To Go
I am surprised that the CW test has lasted this long. With the exception of those hams who want to keep the test, what other reason is there to keep the test? If you do not plan to use CW, why test for it.
I have heard that some think that by keeping the test you raise the bar on the quality of the ham radio operator you get in return. I do not think this is true.
I passed the code test almost 40 years ago and I think I peaked in code copy at around 20 wpm. So, my comments are not because I can't copy code, they are because I think the test is obsolete.
The testing that needs to be enhanced though is covering of rules and regulations, safety, and enough RF theory so that you know how to operate your station and not create tons of RFI. I believe that the testing needs to include more practical theory and knowledge on quality operation.
Posted by
K7PEH on 2005-08-03
Dropping CW is no big deal
This day has been a long time coming -- essentially, eliminating mandatory Morse Code testing to operate on the ham bands started when radiotelephone techniques were perfected about 85 years ago.
Let me say up front I love CW and operate it a lot. I got my Extra in 1979 and during my 36 years on the air, I have made about 70,000 QSOs -- about 45 percent of them on CW. I have several operating awards, including CW DXCC. But as much as I like the mode, the time has arrived for it to lose its special status, i.e. mandatory testing.
It's human nature to oppose change but change is the ONLY constant in life. CW will not disappear from the ham bands. Many will continue using it and certainly some newcomers will be fascinated by it and learn it on their own. But the predictions of gloom and doom for the ham bands and baseless prognostications of CB-like lawlessness on the air conveniently ignore the fact that some very challenging written exams remain. If all testing was going away, such claims might be legitimate but since written exams to get on the ham bands will remain as the appropriate filter, the "sky is falling" crowd totally fails to impress me with these predictions based on sheer emotion and no facts. Comparisons to CB problems are invalid since CB has no testing and no licensing.
I have known personally too many good people, many of them very technically inclined, who would have made great hams and been real assets to the amateur radio service. But Morse Code -- and testing in general for a few -- scared them off. I have no sympathy for someone who won't even study for a written exam. But Morse Code is a another issue.
It's a far better strategy to lure someone into the lair -- our hobby -- and then gradually work up to the challenging stuff as opposed to hitting them right away with the daunting challenges and hoping they're tough enough to run the Morse Code gauntlet.
Let's face it. A 5 wpm code proficiency is fairly minimal. There was grumbling when the FCC implemented it in 2000 and a few "the sky is falling" comments made but that has proven not to be true. There will be little change in going from 5 to 0 wmp.
More than 20 nations have dropped mandatory Morse Code testing already -- mostly in Europe. Is it a coincidence that Europe is often ahead of the USA in adapting to new and advanced technologies? What do the Europeans know that we don't? Apparently, they know something we don't. We are arrogant if we think we are somehow smarter than those European nations that have dumped mandatory Morse Code testing.
I was stunned a few years ago to drive through a community which had a 2-meter repeater which was not open to no-code technician licensees. The ham who I was speaking with seemed so proud of the fact they didn't "allow those no-coders" on their repeater. How unfriendly. How utterly against every principle expressed in the Amateur's Code. How unwise and mean spirited.
I sure hope that when we get a lot of new hams -- which will happen because the FCC has made it no secret since 2000 that mandatory Morse Code testing served no real purpose -- that we can be friendly and accepting of these new hams. They will deserve to be treated with respect and dignity and mentored into being fine operators -- not shunned or ignored.
My opinion on this will surprise some who just naturally expect a 20 wpm Extra to support Morse Code testing to the death. And my view will put me at odds with some very dear ham radio friends I've made over the years. But I sincerely believe eliminating the mandatory Morse Code decision will be the best for the future of ham radio. Please spare me the arguments about filtering, lawlessness, its the only mode that gets through when conditions are poor, etc. I've heard it all over and over since first getting on the air in 1969. These arguments are not new and they are not very persuasive in the big picture of wanting amateur radio to prosper in the 21st century.
Thanks for reading this long comment and I hope to see you on the air.
73, Dave, N4KZ
Posted by
N4KZ on 2005-08-03
Keep the code for the Extra
I don't have a problem with eliminating the code for the General class licence, but I would like to see the code requirement kept for the Extra class license
I've been a ham for 29 years and have held a Extra class (20wpm) license since 1994.
Posted by
W4HRC on 2005-08-03
Keep the code for the Extra
I don't have a problem with eliminating the code for the General class licence, but I would like to see the code requirement kept for the Extra class license
I've been a ham for 29 years and have held a Extra class (20wpm) license since 1994.
Posted by
W4HRC on 2005-08-03
Code hardly an Issue
The dropping of the code requirement is funtionally a "non issue". The bigger issue is the current method of license qualification whereby question pools are issued such that only a good memory is now required to be demonstrated. "Cognition free licensing" is inconsistent with technical competence. There is plenty of proof that real learning requires more complex mental activity combined with physical activity( such as hands on experience with test equipment, etc.)Tests should measure these outcomes.
Posted by
KK7WN on 2005-08-03
Deregulation
Now, no CW...Tomorrow, no testing and your "license" will come in the same box with your radio you purchased.
Posted by
KF4VGV on 2005-08-03
NO CODE NO ECOMM NO LICENSE
Wow if this code thing goes,There be a rush on getting a ham license,So look like the CB Band will be much better than the ham band are and will be....Charlie Brown here we go..Can everyone say BPL BPL BPL BPL
Posted by
N2BR on 2005-08-03
Code elimination
It looks like the code requirement is dead.
As the "new kid on the block" I agree with KK7WN that passing the technician test does not assure competence. I spent a month reviewing the answers, taking practice tests on eham.net, and "aced" the exam. It was too easy.
Posted by
KG6ZSU on 2005-08-03
Know-code
I passed the FCC General class code test at 13wpm at the age of 12, so 5 wpm should be child's play. I don't buy the excuse that it is too hard to learn. It takes a little effort, but that's what separates the Amateur Bands from the CB bands. Keep the code, and bring back the Novice class HF privledges to get novices excited about propagation and antennas.
Posted by
K6AX on 2005-08-03
"I have known personally too many good people, many of them very technically inclined, who would have made great hams and been real assets to the amateur radio service. But Morse Code -- and testing in general for a few -- scared them off."
Well good! If they are so easily "scared" off, they should find another hobby.
"I have no sympathy for someone who won't even study for a written exam. But Morse Code is a another issue."
What's the difference? You mean they'll study theory that they'll never use, but they won't study CW that they'll "never use"?
"Ever notice that most (but not all) people in favor of dumping the code are those that have never passed the code? In short, people with something to gain?"
Well.. duh..
The screamers against CW fall into 2 categories; those who are unable to learn it, and those who are unwilling.
Attitude here is everything. I've tried to get people into ham radio, and as soon as you mention CW, they cop an attitude, convincing themselves they cannot learn it, or put up such a fuss about it. Those types never learn. On the other hand, those who have enthusiastically embraced the idea of studying for a license, will almost certainly pass exams.
I have enjoyed this hobby since 1978, and I am so glad I did not give up easily or approach obtaining a license like an appointment for a root canal.
The CW issue is a done deal.
I say bring back the Novice license.. keep a CW requirement at least for Extra, and 5wpm is too slow. Dang folks, if I can do it, anyone can. (if they WANT to)
Posted by
WB4M on 2005-08-03
The Code
Sit down with a set of headphones, tune in W1AW, learn the code, or, go out and buy a CB radio. Why must we play monkey see, monkey do with the rest of the world? A real Ham knows the code.
Posted by
K1EPX on 2005-08-03
Lose it
I could care less if the code goes away. I learned it years ago to get my ticket and then promptly forgot it as I have no interest in it. BUT I would like to see the written test made harder and STOP putting the answers out there! Make the test a REAL test not a guess the answer give away. LEARN something!!!
IMHO.
Posted by
N0FPE on 2005-08-03
Lose it
I could care less if the code goes away. I learned it years ago to get my ticket and then promptly forgot it as I have no interest in it. BUT I would like to see the written test made harder and STOP putting the answers out there! Make the test a REAL test not a guess the answer give away. LEARN something!!!
IMHO.
Posted by
N0FPE on 2005-08-03
Pull your pants up and meet the challenge of morse code. It isn't hard, unless you are lazy.
Posted by
AI8H on 2005-08-03
Pull your pants up and meet the challenge of morse code. It isn't hard, unless you are lazy.
Posted by
AI8H on 2005-08-03
Done deal. The FCC has already made up its mind. The rest of the world hasl also started to remove CW as part of the license requirements. Time to get over it and move on, whether we like it or not.
Posted by
WB2GOF on 2005-08-03
Code elimination
Back when they came up with the no No Code Technician license, I was totally against it because I HAD TO LEARN IT. I even dropped out of the local club because of the type of people I thought it would attract.
After I got active and rejoined the local club, I found out that I was totally wrong about the type of people it attracted. These 'people' brought with them very valuable technology we did not see before.
It was not long and I made very good friends with some of these newcomers. Some taught me about packet radio, some provided knowledge about computers, etc.
Most of these newcomers went on and learned CW and upgraded after they had seen how much fun we 'oldtimers' had.
CW is not dead yet, in fact I believe it is slowly making somewhat of a comeback.
Folks, times and technology change. CW will still be used, even though it is not our 'primary mode' of communication. I would like to see CW as a requirement for full band privilages, but I doubt that will happen.
Who knows what technology will be brought and developed by the "codeless" hams of tomorrow?
73
Jimmy, W9JDH
Posted by
W9JDH on 2005-08-03
Remove the Code
Lets move on or shall we be like the 18th century French and close the patent office.
AA3WS
Posted by
AA3WS on 2005-08-03