FCC Report and Order Posted on New Rules

[AA7BQ]

The FCC today posted the formal Report and Order on
the new rules concerning Morse Code.

They can be downloaded from:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-178A1.pdf

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-178A1.doc

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-178A1.txt

[k7fd]

Don't forget abt straight key night!

73 K7FD

[kc8zgw]

When? I want to be a part!

[KE7JFA]

Quote[/b] (k7fd @ Dec. 19 2006,14:11)]Don't forget abt straight key night!

73 K7FD
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

I knew this whole code thing would make babies out of all the old farts.

[N7YA]

I knew Fred couldnt resist posting another code thread...smart guy.

I wonder how many posts this one will get up to...600? 700? who knows. I need a forum based website, i wonder what kind of numbers it generates with adclicks.

[K6BTM]

Quote[/b] (n2knc @ Dec. 19 2006,15:17)]this is what all the lazy ass people wanted.
Just like little children crying at the checkout stand for candy. Mommy (FCC) caves in and a lesson is learned. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Next time cry that the multiple guess test is tooooo hard and just hand out the candy (Amateur radio licenses). http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[w6em]

Quote[/b] (kc8zgw @ Dec. 18 2006,16:34)]When? I want to be a part!
Thirty days from three weeks from now. Probably about Valentines day.

[n6kzb]

Oh boy a third forum thread about the same subject, how wonderful. Does QRZ get paid for keyboard #clicks, hi.

Ok, now to ensure many more QRZ forum pages are created............

----------------------------------
"No Special Advantage to Retaining the Morse Requirement

In today's R&O, the FCC cast aside arguments that Morse ability is advantageous in emergency communication situations. "The Commission previously addressed the essence of this argument and concluded that most emergency communication today is performed using voice, data, or video techniques," the FCC said. The Commission also turned away assertions that retaining a Morse code requirement would help in keeping out the bad apples.

"The record is devoid of a demonstrated nexus between Morse code proficiency and on-the-air conduct," the FCC observed. "As a result, we concur with the observation that 'maintaining the code requirement does not purge Amateur Radio of bad operators. Education and self-policing does.'"

The Commission further reiterated its belief that the ability to demonstrate increased Morse code proficiency doesn't necessarily indicate an applicant's ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art. "A number of commenters agree that the Morse code requirement 'keeps individuals that would enhance the hobby from getting a license,' and that there is 'no relationship between an individual's knowledge of Morse code and that individual's knowledge of radio regulations and practices and skills necessary to operate an amateur station.'"

-----------------------------------------
So well put !! Another myth put to bed !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[w6em]

Quote[/b] (n6kzb @ Dec. 18 2006,17:33)]Ok, now to ensure many more QRZ forum pages are created............
Troll-on, buddy. #El zapato es su nombre.

It helps Fred's 'hit count' that he uses to justify what he charges for ad space.

At least with eHam, you don't have to put up with obnoxious Avitars.....

[W4CBJ]

Nice going guys. Keep the Morse code controversy alive and well. I understand there is a Morse code program for computers that you can send and receive. Tell Microsoft and others that we want a keyer module built into new computers to make up for our loss on the air. KEEP IT GOING ! # 73 # Joe #W4CBJ

[N1ZW]

CW or no CW it doen not matter iether way. what does it matter if another ham uses it or not really? I myself like but, it does not mean i prefer it over another mode or that i am a ace at it because let me say I am far from being the ace I wish I was at CW. I know some folks that can sit all day and pund the keys or paddles all day and thru the night, and that is just super. It does not mean they are any better at doing other modes. Each of us has our own thing we like doing in this hobby. That's right hobby just like flying model airplanes and or flying kites. Building kits , and building antennas , even radios for some of those hams that understand things better or are more educated in areas of electronics. It is one thing to say we need to CW when even most the worlds militarys have not used it in years.

For those of us that like doing the CW then we can keep on doing it, Know said we can do it. Since the FCC has decided to go along with the rest of the world, that now makes them the enemy? I would think not. I see many new hams getting more interested in the more updated versions of commnications. Most the digital modes are great modes and lot's of fun too. We need the hobby to continue to grow and that means we need new blood and younger brains more open to new ideas. With things like the internet and cell phones and sats all over the earths orbit why is it such a big debate all the time.

Just do what you like doing and let the new hams do the same. it all falls sown to one thnig in the end and that is doing what it takes to keep this hobby interesting enough to get younger people into and off the streets, out of gangs, and back into schools. Keeping our kids educated and intrested in something is hard enough with discouraging them about a mode very few want to use. Just my own thoughts....:blues:

[KB5DRJ]

Here we go again! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[K8MHZ]

Well, here are the results of the dropping of the test so far....my how news travels.

I am aware of 8 people that are now interested in getting their ham licenses and only so because of the dropping of the code impediment. #7 broadcast engineers (one a chief engineer for a network station) and an engineering professor at the University of California, Irvine.

So far I know of NO CB'ers that suddenly want to be hams.

It appears to me that the FCC did the right thing.

[K8MHZ]

Quote[/b] ]At least with eHam, you don't have to put up with obnoxious Avitars.....


No, just obnoxious posters and a lack of moderation.

QRZ is far superior to eHam in many respects.

[km5yk]

I was down under on the old 27 megaband and there is a lot of talk about gittin the ticket to expand up from 27 megapops. The boyz are thrilled at the prospect of gittin in da 20 megapop pileups.

[KE7GGV]

The funny thing...that I am sure that new people....will realize...they will have a small segment of 10M..to do SSB Phone...that is fine...but when you are a TECH upgrade....you have CW...alloted on bands..so my question is....if they want the CW gone for testing to be on HF...are you going to use CW....so CW..is not going away....just the requirement..I am No-Code Tech....just passed element 3....and planning to go upgrade...

Here is what I think.....that the new to be HF operators(like me)....should
have skills...and though it will be opening up...to the no-codes and
such...they need to take responsibility....this is not a duck
shoot/open season...but a very serious thing....and not taken
lightly...

I passed my Element 3....I still plan to learn and use CW...inspite
of the change...I am a tech now....but as a to be new person to
HF....we do need to demonstrate..like in other countires when they
dropped the CW...I can understand things change with time and we
progress...and the new ones like me need to be held
accountable....and just because we are handed this with little
effort...we need to thank the other operators who paved the way and
worked very hard for this....

Again I am very greatful for this...though CW is learnable....it
will take time..and I want to be responsible...for this
privlidge....I am looking forward to this...I do plan to use CW..and
I can see why it is used in many ways..I apoligize for those who can
be jerks...and not see the picture and I can see those who feel it
will be CB radio...

Ok new ones or to be new ones...we need to show respect and earn
this...and not take advantage....inspite being easier...THX DE
KE7GGV-AAR0AJ..

73 TO ALL...

gaules@comcast.net

Gerald Gaule
73..KE7GGV/*AAR0AJ/T(tech)-Gerald R.Gaule Albany Oregon
145.290(-) (no tone)-WA7ABU Repeater
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/KE7GGV
ECHOLINK NODE # 283278
http://www.echolink.org
*Oregon Army M.A.R.S. callsign..I thought this was funny???..but ironic....

Subject: FCC Announcment

Washington D.C.-

It was announced today that Kellogg's and the Federal Communications
Commission
have signed a pact to issue Amateur Radio Licenses on specially
marked boxes of
Corn Flakes.

In this unprecedented move the FCC believes this will not hurt
amateur radio but
allow all individuals to receive an amateur radio license without
having to
demonstrate any skills with the exception of being able to use a
pair of scissors
to cut out their operating permit from the breakfast cereal box.

Kellogg's spokesperson commented that they were proud to have been
selected by the
government to be the issuer of licenses for amateur radio in the US
and hope to
soon make an agreement with other cereal loving countries. They also
expect that
will be issuing certificates of achievement for DXCF for confirmed
contacts with
100 corn flakers...or should the CSCE..be printed on Cracker Jacks boxes...LOL...KE7GGV...

[kc2qjf]

heck i know of many cbers and other non licensed operators that as of january 2007 are going for their ham test joy


http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[KB2UBH]

Personally I think it is far overdue. I have been waiting 30+ years for it. My Uncle and I started out in CB long ago. Back when you could talk to Europe on 5 watts. He went on to become an extra, 20+ wpm CW. Me, I could never learn it. It all sounds the same to me. Don't even dare try and tell me I didn't try. 30 years I tried, and he tried to help also. All kinds of different methods, so called sure fire ways. I am an industrial electrician by trade, work on all kinds of PLC's, PC's, radio controlled automated equipment. I am also a former flight medic with a medivac company. I was also in Nuclear Weapons Electronics in the service. I know how to study. Code is the only thing I have never been able to master.

But that is all in the past now. I will be getting my general soon......and my extra. I have been in electronics since the 60's. I know theory, built radios, fixed radios.

I consider this a wonderful christmas present from the FCC. THANK YOU!!!

Oh, and BTW, there were lids and bad hams on 80 meters back in the 70's too. You OF's that make out like it was all peaches and cream back then just fooling yourselves, but not those of us that have been listening for 30+ years.

[K1VSK]

After all these different threads on the subject, there clearly is nothing intelligent left to say either pro or con.

Any further comments serve only to demonstrate how oblivious you are!

[K8MHZ]

To all you pro-code testing ARRL members, I found this part of the new FCC order to be very interesting:

Quote[/b] ]Additionally, we are declining ARRL’s request that Novice and Technician Class
licensees be given voice and image privileges in certain segments of the 80, 40, 15 and 10 m bands.
Our action today giving Technician Class licensees the same privileges as Technician Plus Class licensees
does effectively provide some of the relief ARRL seeks because Technician class licensees now have
voice and digital privileges in the 10 m HF band. However, we are concerned that giving Novice and
Technician class licensees voice privileges in the other HF bands would be a disincentive for these
licensees to improve their knowledge and skills and attain a higher class license. Passing the thirty-five
question written examination for the intermediate class of license -- the General Class -- is well within
the capability of most, if not all, Technician and Technician Plus licensees, particularly given the study
guides and other aids available from, among others, the ARRL. However, providing the complete relief
ARRL requests and removing most of the “reward” for passing the examination -- access to other HF
bands -- would likewise remove the incentive to do so and would be inconsistent with the Commission’s
rationale for establishing different operator license classes. We therefore are not persuaded that we
should make further changes in the operating privileges attendant on the current license classes given the
record before us.

[KC8VWM]

I would like to add that with this recent R&O released today - U.S. hams are currently in the media spotlight being "watched" by the outside community.

Let me give an example:

A non ham from a popular computer nerd website commenting on the recent news:

----------------------

"Radio hasn't ALWAYS fascinated me, but growing up with those cheap toy walkie talkies and watching my father with his radio equipment, my eyes have opened to the fact that even the regular consumer headsets at Radio Shack were peanuts if you devoted time and money to something like that.

After I turned to wireless Ethernet, I really got excited to the possibilities of radio. Now that a requirement like this has been dropped, I've become more motivated to getting a license. However, I don't know where to start. Where WOULD I start if I wanted to get a license and, more importantly, the knowledge of radio?"

-------------------

No not exactly a "CBer" and I suspect we will be seeing more interest expressed like this in the near future.

Perhaps, this should be a reminder that as ambassadors representing our shared interest, we should conduct ourselves appropriately.

73

[K1VSK]

Quote[/b] (K1VSK @ Dec. 19 2006,17:56)]After all these different threads on the subject, there clearly is nothing intelligent left to say either pro or con.

Any further comments serve only to demonstrate how oblivious you are!
not bad - 2 more in 5 minutes!
anyone else?

[W4GSK]

Quote[/b] (kc2qjf @ Dec. 19 2006,17:41)]heck i know of many cbers and other non licensed operators that as of january 2007 are going for their ham test joy


http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Really? I happen to know a lot of CBers too and NONE of them would touch the Ham bands with a 10 foot cattle prod! They're quite happy where they are. They have anonymity, freedom to do and say what they want, no rules, no consequences. Hmmm, wait a minute. Come to think of it, what am I doing here? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[k9aro]

Quote[/b] (N1ZW @ Dec. 19 2006,09:36)]CW or no CW it doen not matter iether way. what does it matter if another ham uses it or not really? I myself like but, it does not mean i prefer it over another mode or that i am a ace at it because let me say I am far from being the ace I wish I was at CW. I know some folks that can sit all day and pund the keys or paddles all day and thru the night, and that is just super. It does not mean they are any better at doing other modes. Each of us has our own thing we like doing in this hobby. That's right hobby just like flying model airplanes and or flying kites. Building kits , and building antennas , even radios for some of those hams that understand things better or are more educated in areas of electronics. It is one thing to say we need to CW when even most the worlds militarys have not used it in years.

For those of us that like doing the CW then we can keep on doing it, Know said we can do it. Since the FCC has decided to go along with the rest of the world, that now makes them the enemy? I would think not. I see many new hams getting more interested in the more updated versions of commnications. Most the digital modes are great modes and lot's of fun too. We need the hobby to continue to grow and that means we need new blood and younger brains more open to new ideas. With things like the internet and cell phones and sats all over the earths orbit why is it such a big debate all the time.

Just do what you like doing and let the new hams do the same. it all falls sown to one thnig in the end and that is doing what it takes to keep this hobby interesting enough to get younger people into and off the streets, out of gangs, and back into schools. Keeping our kids educated and intrested in something is hard enough with discouraging them about a mode very few want to use. Just my own thoughts....:blues:
That is the best Post I have seen, WELL DONE http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[K1VSK]

Any intelligent living people out there?
Do you people even bother to read what has been said multiple time before.?

[KB2UBH]

Quote[/b] (K1VSK @ Dec. 19 2006,20:25)]Any intelligent living people out there?
Do you people even bother to read what has been said multiple time before.?
SURE!!!!! LOL But everyone has their opinion on it and like to express it.

[n0rie]

well////there is the choice of what to do
with the on/off button ......:p http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
i say ON for now to see how it goes's
73 see you on hf or vhf/uhf bands
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (KE7JFA @ Dec. 19 2006,17:07)]Quote[/b] (k7fd @ Dec. 19 2006,14:11)]Don't forget abt straight key night!

73 K7FD
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

I knew this whole code thing would make babies out of all the old farts.
Wrong. I think everyone showed their true colors.

The OF's who whined, and the anti-coders who showed complete disrespect and arrogance were a complete disgrace to what I thought was a really gentleman like hobby.

But in spite of this, I plan to go on, business as usual. I already passed my two code tests, and for that achievement I am at peace with myself.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (k8mhz @ Dec. 19 2006,18:54)]Well, here are the results of the dropping of the test so far....my how news travels.

I am aware of 8 people that are now interested in getting their ham licenses and only so because of the dropping of the code impediment. 7 broadcast engineers (one a chief engineer for a network station) and an engineering professor at the University of California, Irvine.

So far I know of NO CB'ers that suddenly want to be hams.

It appears to me that the FCC did the right thing.
Silly question, since we already had codeless licenses for 15 years now, and really easy 5WPM code for 5, why only now are they interested in becoming hams?

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (n6kzb @ Dec. 19 2006,17:33)]Oh boy a third forum thread about the same subject, how wonderful. Does QRZ get paid for keyboard clicks, hi.

Ok, now to ensure many more QRZ forum pages are created............

----------------------------------
"No Special Advantage to Retaining the Morse Requirement

In today's R&O, the FCC cast aside arguments that Morse ability is advantageous in emergency communication situations. "The Commission previously addressed the essence of this argument and concluded that most emergency communication today is performed using voice, data, or video techniques," the FCC said. The Commission also turned away assertions that retaining a Morse code requirement would help in keeping out the bad apples.

"The record is devoid of a demonstrated nexus between Morse code proficiency and on-the-air conduct," the FCC observed. "As a result, we concur with the observation that 'maintaining the code requirement does not purge Amateur Radio of bad operators. Education and self-policing does.'"

The Commission further reiterated its belief that the ability to demonstrate increased Morse code proficiency doesn't necessarily indicate an applicant's ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art. "A number of commenters agree that the Morse code requirement 'keeps individuals that would enhance the hobby from getting a license,' and that there is 'no relationship between an individual's knowledge of Morse code and that individual's knowledge of radio regulations and practices and skills necessary to operate an amateur station.'"

-----------------------------------------
So well put !! Another myth put to bed !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Not really put to bed, but more or less ignored by the FCC.

Remember that the FCC decisions are just that, a human decision made by humans. They can interpret the comments and the hobby any way they see fit.

[kd5vjn]

OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve

[N3JI]

Quote[/b] (kc8vwm @ Dec. 19 2006,19:09)]I would like to add that with this recent R&O released today - U.S. hams are currently in the media spotlight being "watched" by the outside community.

Let me give an example:

A non ham from a popular computer nerd website commenting on the recent news:

----------------------

"Radio hasn't ALWAYS fascinated me, but growing up with those cheap toy walkie talkies and watching my father with his radio equipment, my eyes have opened to the fact that even the regular consumer headsets at Radio Shack were peanuts if you devoted time and money to something like that.

After I turned to wireless Ethernet, I really got excited to the possibilities of radio. Now that a requirement like this has been dropped, I've become more motivated to getting a license. However, I don't know where to start. Where WOULD I start if I wanted to get a license and, more importantly, the knowledge of radio?"

-------------------

No not exactly a "CBer" and I suspect we will be seeing more interest expressed like this in the near future.

Perhaps, this should be a reminder that as ambassadors representing our shared interest, we should conduct ourselves appropriately.

73
Oddly enough, I know a fairly large number of folks in my Air Force Communications Unit that are very interested in getting licensed now.

To answer AB2MH's question about why they weren't interested before (and I quote): "Yeah, but you have to learn that ditty-bop stuff". I explained that there is a No-Code license, but once they found out that it was VHF+ only, they weren't interested. Basically, *NO* interest in learning code whatsoever. That is your answer.

At the unit's 50th anniversary, I got a special event call sign and set up an HF demo station. Unfortunately, there was CME or something that killed HF that weekend, so we had almost no contacts. I did make a single CW contact, but the operator kept pushing me for "the rest of my callsign". I explained that I was running a special event with a 1x1, but he "explained" to me that there was no such thing as a 1x1 and never came back again. Go figure.

Joe, N3JI

[N3JI]

Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. Techs still have to upgrade to General. And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI

[KE5CCN]

Guys and Gals:
It seems like we opened another can of worms
again. I'm studying now to upgrade from Tech to
General now and not because I didn't want to
learn CW before, I just did not have the time to
do it. I have a 3 friends who are Techs now studing
to upgrade to General class, including one guy who
has not used his radio in 5-7 years.This no-code
thing is like water under bridge or a kid crying over spilled milk. The fat lady has sung. Let's put this
behind us and welcome the new Generals to HF
whether they are CB'ers or Techs.
73's Good DX
KE5CCN

[K4JF]

Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 18 2006,21:07)]Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. #Techs still have to upgrade to General. #And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. #I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI
Not quite, Joe. #Techs without CW endorsement will receive access to the same HF bands that "Tech plus" has now. #Fone on part of 10m and same as Novices on the other HF bands.

[w6em]

Quote[/b] (k8mhz @ Dec. 18 2006,18:54)]So far I know of NO CB'ers that suddenly want to be hams.
Just how many CBers do you know, Mark? And of those, how many did you ask?

I assume all of the others you mention got the information about the rules changes directly from you, with the popped question.

[n3cdx]

I Cant Believe All these cry baby's!!!Look I listen to 40m 20m 75m and 80m all the time and hear CB garbage bad vocab.But yet you older hams are crying about the fcc making this change and now cbers are looking to get ham tickets.well let the cbers get the ticket and come to amateur radio and do what they do on cb i hope everyone of them get busted by the FCC and get a serious fine I'd Love that.You want to cry about something,Cry about that,not that we (TECHS) got it giving to us on a silver platter.I have not read a darn thing ever in here about HF having bad vocab on it but you want to whine about the FCC doing away with the code...THANK YOU FCC!!!!!73'S N3TLG GREENVILLE,PENNSYLVANIA

[KA3TGV]

You have to be a rocket scientist or brain surgeon to copy 5 word per minute Morse Code.

Learning Morse Code is comparable to learning integral calculus.

My words are dripping with sarcasm.

And they're not the only thing dripping on this forum.

[N3JI]

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Dec. 19 2006,21:16)]Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 18 2006,21:07)]Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. Techs still have to upgrade to General. And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI
Not quite, Joe. Techs without CW endorsement will receive access to the same HF bands that "Tech plus" has now. Fone on part of 10m and same as Novices on the other HF bands.
First of all, you know what he meant (but yeah, you're right!). Second of all, there is no "Tech Plus" anymore. There is only "Technician with Code", which of course is not on the license. So technically, any Technician with a recent license could get on the old Novice/Tech Plus bands. Nobody would know any different unless someone with direct knowlege of the individual not having a CSCE for the code happened across him on HF, or of course, the FCC asked him to produce his CSCE for some reason (pretty slim odds of that happening!).

Joe, N3JI

[K4JF]

Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 18 2006,21:28)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Dec. 19 2006,21:16)]Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 18 2006,21:07)]Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. #Techs still have to upgrade to General. #And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. #I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI
Not quite, Joe. #Techs without CW endorsement will receive access to the same HF bands that "Tech plus" has now. #Fone on part of 10m and same as Novices on the other HF bands.
First of all, you know what he meant (but yeah, you're right!). #Second of all, there is no "Tech Plus" anymore. #There is only "Technician with Code", which of course is not on the license. #So technically, any Technician with a recent license could get on the old Novice/Tech Plus bands. #Nobody would know any different unless someone with direct knowlege of the individual not having a CSCE for the code happened across him on HF, or of course, the FCC asked him to produce his CSCE for some reason (pretty slim odds of that happening!).

Joe, N3JI
I know. "Tech with code" is the formal term for what is commonly called "tech plus" which is, of course, short for Tech+code element. And you're right, it probably legalized some operators who were "fudging" the rules.

I didn't think it was a good idea to stop showing the difference, myself.

But there is a heck of a lot of fiction about "automatic upgrades" and "grandfathering" going around. And the FCC has clearly stated there will be none of that.

[N1BHH]

Quote[/b] (K6BTM @ Dec. 19 2006,17:25)]Quote[/b] (n2knc @ Dec. 19 2006,15:17)]this is what all the lazy ass people wanted.
Just like little children crying at the checkout stand for candy. Mommy (FCC) caves in and a lesson is learned. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Next time cry that the multiple guess test is tooooo hard and just hand out the candy (Amateur radio licenses). http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
You are correct, babies crying to mommy. The FCC will not cave in to a bunch of bawling brats. The majority of those with the crocodile tears are not very forward thinking. Morse code ability has held many very smart young people from the ranks of amateur radio. Now, we may just get some people with some brains in here who have something to contribute. My signature says it all, I know the morse code and love it to death.

[w7nb]

I've never weighed in on the code no code argument. Allways thought it was sort of like beating a dead horse.

A lot of general and extra class folks learned code, got their upgrade, and promptly forgot it. Never made a QSO, never logged any DX or anything else. It was simply a hazing ritual that older hams used as a "Bar" to see if someone was really serious about the hobby.

I still use CW for 2 things - contesting and DXing. No "Sometimes it's all that works" crap here - I use digital modes that make CW look just like the antique mode that it is. 100% copy when I can't even zero beat a CW signal for the noise. I'll continue to use CW for the same reasons as usual - that rare DX contact, running mode counters in contests etc.

THe fat lady sang folks. So stop crying and start doing what was done for you years ago. ELMER! Take these new folks under wing and teach them the ropes. Teach them the RIGHT WAY to handle HF communications. HELP THEM set up their shack and antennas properly. If we end up with a bunch of poor operators it has nothing to do with CW - it's the whiny OM club who can't use their glass arms to lift a finger to help these new generals who will be comming our way!

[N3JI]

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Dec. 19 2006,21:57)]Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 18 2006,21:28)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Dec. 19 2006,21:16)]Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 18 2006,21:07)]Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. Techs still have to upgrade to General. And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI
Not quite, Joe. Techs without CW endorsement will receive access to the same HF bands that "Tech plus" has now. Fone on part of 10m and same as Novices on the other HF bands.
First of all, you know what he meant (but yeah, you're right!). Second of all, there is no "Tech Plus" anymore. There is only "Technician with Code", which of course is not on the license. So technically, any Technician with a recent license could get on the old Novice/Tech Plus bands. Nobody would know any different unless someone with direct knowlege of the individual not having a CSCE for the code happened across him on HF, or of course, the FCC asked him to produce his CSCE for some reason (pretty slim odds of that happening!).

Joe, N3JI
I know. "Tech with code" is the formal term for what is commonly called "tech plus" which is, of course, short for Tech+code element. And you're right, it probably legalized some operators who were "fudging" the rules.

I didn't think it was a good idea to stop showing the difference, myself.

But there is a heck of a lot of fiction about "automatic upgrades" and "grandfathering" going around. And the FCC has clearly stated there will be none of that.
Too bad. All it takes is a little reading to get it straight from the source...

Here's some interesting trivia (okay, it's probably only interesting to me because it's about me!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ). I was never a "Technician". I was a "Tech Plus". I was also never a General and never passed the 13 wpm code test. I studied for my General & Advanced with the intention of passing the 13 wpm test. I was offered the 20 wpm test since it was being played anyway and passed it. I also passed the General & Advanced written test & received my Advanced Class license that day. I then studied for my Extra since I now had the coveted 20 wpm code test CSCE in my hands and passed it within the year. So I went from Novice to Tech Plus, to Advanced, to Extra, and passed only two code tests. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Okay, so maybe I'm blowing my own horn, but I just want to put it out there that with a little effort, much is possible!! There is still plenty of time to study for and pass the 5 wpm code test, so if you're serious, go for it!!!

Joe, N3JI

[K4JF]

Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 18 2006,22:31)]Here's some interesting trivia (okay, it's probably only interesting to me because it's about me!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ). #I was never a "Technician". #I was a "Tech Plus". #I was also never a General and never passed the 13 wpm code test. #I studied for my General & Advanced with the intention of passing the 13 wpm test. #I was offered the 20 wpm test since it was being played anyway and passed it. #I also passed the General & Advanced written test & received my Advanced Class license that day. #I then studied for my Extra since I now had the coveted 20 wpm code test CSCE in my hands and passed it within the year. #So I went from Novice to Tech Plus, to Advanced, to Extra, and passed only two code tests. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Okay, so maybe I'm blowing my own horn, but I just want to put it out there that with a little effort, much is possible!! #There is still plenty of time to study for and pass the 5 wpm code test, so if you're serious, go for it!!!

Joe, N3JI
I found it interesting. #I have a bit of an interesting story, too, Joe. #Although I was a General for over 20 years, I never took a 13 wpm code test. #

I was up from 5 to 25 or so in my time as a busy Novice (which included WAS). #When I went to Atlanta to take my General, I took the 20 wpm test just because it was first and thought it would make the 13 wpm test seem slow. #Of course I was very nervous, and I missed it by one character. #The FCC examiner said it was obvious that it was nervousness, and I knew what I was doing so he signed off on the 13 and sent me in to take my General written! #So I guess you could say I was a 19 wpm General! #:o)

It was quite a few years later that I took my Extra. #Slowing down to 20 wpm for the code test was the easy part. Of course I did have to study for a lot of modes I had no plans to use, but I'm glad I did...it has added to the interest.

[N3JI]

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Dec. 19 2006,22:41)]Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 18 2006,22:31)]Here's some interesting trivia (okay, it's probably only interesting to me because it's about me!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ). I was never a "Technician". I was a "Tech Plus". I was also never a General and never passed the 13 wpm code test. I studied for my General & Advanced with the intention of passing the 13 wpm test. I was offered the 20 wpm test since it was being played anyway and passed it. I also passed the General & Advanced written test & received my Advanced Class license that day. I then studied for my Extra since I now had the coveted 20 wpm code test CSCE in my hands and passed it within the year. So I went from Novice to Tech Plus, to Advanced, to Extra, and passed only two code tests. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Okay, so maybe I'm blowing my own horn, but I just want to put it out there that with a little effort, much is possible!! There is still plenty of time to study for and pass the 5 wpm code test, so if you're serious, go for it!!!

Joe, N3JI
I found it interesting. I have a bit of an interesting story, too, Joe. Although I was a General for over 20 years, I never took a 13 wpm code test.

I was up from 5 to 25 or so in my time as a busy Novice (which included WAS). When I went to Atlanta to take my General, I took the 20 wpm test just because it was first and thought it would make the 13 wpm test seem slow. Of course I was very nervous, and I missed it by one character. The FCC examiner said it was obvious that it was nervousness, and I knew what I was doing so he signed off on the 13 and sent me in to take my General written! So I guess you could say I was a 19 wpm General! :o)

It was quite a few years later that I took my Extra. Slowing down to 20 wpm for the code test was the easy part. Of course I did have to study for a lot of modes I had no plans to use, but I'm glad I did...it has added to the interest.
Hey, that *is* pretty interesting!! I doubt something like that would happen these days with VEs, since there have been so many "crackdowns" on dodgy testing practices. Maybe we should start a "Here's how I got licensed" thread... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[ky5u]

Interesting comments. Techs will have CW privleges on several bands and it appears phone on a segment of 10 meters. Check out the bandplan on the FCC site for more info.

And while you're at it, before you crank up on HF, take the time to familiarize yourself with the various "calling frequencies" like SSTV and the AM window on 75M and other bands. For AM on 75M, pretty much 3880 to 3890 is used in the mornings, evenings and into the night. Remember if you start up next to an AM QSO, you should allow 4kHz instead of the normal 3 kHZ for SSB. This is but one example of things like QRP calling frequencies, RTTY/PSK suggested operating areas, etc. Don't be offended if you don't and you get called on it.

Try http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html for info.

For Technicians, you gain the Tech Plus phone privleges between 28.3 and 28.5 if I read the R&O correctly and you're limited to 200W. This is by virtue of the FCC making NCTs and Tech Plus equal in allocations. Novice OPs do not get Tech privleges. Someone feel free to correct me if this is wrong.

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/Hambands_color.pdf

has all the details. Just remember that if you're an NCT to look at Tech Plus privleges because you will have them when the R&O takes effect.

[n6dtc]

I hope it puts a lot more people on the air for me to contact and more money for Radio Manufacturers so I Can have Better Cheaper Radio's and more money for the FCC so they can police the bands better . I can spin my dial now and not hear a sole sometimes. I think that is what this change is about.

[K7JEM]

100% correct Charlie.

[N3JI]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 19 2006,23:25)]100% correct Charlie.
Except for assuming 3 or 4 kHz sidebands. Some folks run wider than 3k on SSB and 8k on AM. Rule of thumb is that if you hear QRM, then they're probably able to hear your QRM, so please keep turning the VFO until you don't hear any...

[KI6GWS]

The FCC's rules change is essentially meaningless to me as I have an interest CW, so, learning code for me is essential. Sure, phone is fun, I enjoy rag chewing, but, my long term HAM interests are in CW on HF. There's just way too much to be had from CW and a satisfaction that awaits me in doing so.

Folks can go bat-chit about this or can get over it and Elmer a new HAM. The way I see it, what happens to HAM is up to HAMs, Elmer or don't Elmer, teach the newer HAMs right lest you lose the right to piss and moan about it. We can continue to crap all over eachother as the past dozen or so threads exemplify and walk away pissed off, or, we can go back to the good will of HAMs, perpetuate the hobby properly through peer guidance.

The FCC hasn't ruined HAM radio, HAMs will be responcible for that should such an event occur. As far as Amature Radio turning into duplicity with CB, all I can say to those doomsayers is "Have you even listened CB lately"? They are destroying themselves, crack pipe in one hand and mic in the other. They don't want to study for ANY exam, much less get a license, they buy a radio, often second hand, hook it up and giddy-up go Daddy! Fortunate are we that HAM requires some "Geek-a-ry" and "Nerd-dom", something that is beyond all the "Good Buddies" and the "Breaker breakers".

Rant over, 73..

[n5ntg]

I manage a web site called #SanAntonioHams.org (http://www.SanAntonioHams.org) where I track the activities of about 21 local ham clubs / groups who use ham radio support. #I noted the three largest clubs had about a 50% overlap of members, but none of them had more than a couple of hundred listed. Just for grins and giggles, I ran a search of the FCC.gov database for licensed ham radio operators in my local area (San Antonio, TX) and found nearly 2,200 hams. #Wow! #But where are they I asked? # So I pulled out the club rosters for all the local ham clubs and was not surprised to find out that most of them were not listed.

Our local ARES group has less than 100 hams registered, and the most we've been able to call out for our larger public service events has been about 60. #In a metro area the size of San Antonio, that's not too impressive in my book when you remember the 2200 hams licensed in the area.

Apparently to some hams, their license means different things to them. #Some use it to do CW, some do HF, others simply do local VHF/UHF, some do Microwave, some add in public service and others like to get trained for emergency response. #Not all hams like to do the same thing. #And some <gasp> haven't even been on the air since they got their license. #I met a guy at the local ham store last week, a technician license who held his license for 12 years, but hadn't been on the air for the past 10. #When the FCC announced the changes, he came in to the store, bought one of the last remaining General Class license books, and told me he was going to upgrade and get back active in our hobby.

Everybody with an FCC issued ham license is a ham, and it doesn't matter to me if you did, or didn't, pass a code test to get on HF (unless you are trying horribly to send me CW).

I didn't have to take a test to demonstrate proficiency in voice operations (i.e. keying a mike to transmit voice, releasing to listen, or monitoring before transmitting). I learned that listening to others on the air. #

I didn't take a test to demonstrate proficiency in using PSK31 before using. #Some kind hams were nice enough to give me constructive on-the-air feedback when I was learning, so that now I can easily turn on my rig and my laptop to be on PSK31 in a matter of minutes.

So why was I required to demonstrate proficiency in CW before using it? #I learned it long enough to pass my tests and get my license. #I let those who like CW in my area use CW and knowing them, CW is in NO danger of becoming extinct very soon.

73 de Lee N5NTG
San Antonio, TX

[N5FOG]

Talk about cry babies and immature behavior I found where some group called "Federation for uncompromised proficiency" aka FED-UP put up a website calling for all hams that passed the code test to light up the "new" phone bands they claim were "stolen from them" with as much CW as possible in protest.

What does this reflect to new hams just coming into the hobby that hear then kind of tripe?

Change is inevitable and failure to adapt to change can often be much more dangerous and hazardous than the change itself.


Eric Kc5Fog

[N5DUX]

I was actually surprised about the ARRL wanting a new entry-level license. From the document, it looks like they were wanting a Jr.-ultra-intro license. I thought the No-code Tech was created in the early 90s for this reason. Now they want a super-novice license that kids can get. I guess hadn't ever heard of that proposal.

Quote[/b] ]
Additionally, we are declining ARRL’s request that Novice and Technician Class
licensees be given voice and image privileges in certain segments of the 80, 40, 15 and 10 m bands.

I was also unaware the ARRL wanted to give Technicians so much HF operating ability.

*disclaimer: this post is neither pro/con the whole "ba-humbug" feel of the FCC's new order.
I just find the whole thing interesting. Like it or not, it's definitely a major turning point for amateur radio and it will be interesting to see what comes of the change.
I wasn't in the hobby, but I'm guessing there was a lot of similar attitudes for the creation of the No-Code Tech and the change from faster speeds down to 5wpm for General and Extra. (although, maybe to a lesser extent.)

[w8esp]

Think of all that equipment they can export now

[kb2wye]

here we go again... enough already! It's over and done with. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[n9lya]

J.F.C.

Not again...


Must be a conspriacy to let the world see how well HAMS do not get along on the internet..


73 jerry

[kb2wye]

Quote[/b] (n9lya @ Dec. 20 2006,07:49)]J.F.C.

Not again...


Must be a conspriacy to let the world see how well HAMS do not get along on the internet..


73 jerry
How true!!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (KA3TGV @ Dec. 19 2006,22:27)]You have to be a rocket scientist or brain surgeon to copy 5 word per minute Morse Code.

Learning Morse Code is comparable to learning integral calculus.

My words are dripping with sarcasm.

And they're not the only thing dripping on this forum.
Integral calculus isn't really all that hard.

It's DE that will get you though.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (N5DUX @ Dec. 20 2006,04:11)]I was actually surprised about the ARRL wanting a new entry-level license. From the document, it looks like they were wanting a Jr.-ultra-intro license. I thought the No-code Tech was created in the early 90s for this reason. Now they want a super-novice license that kids can get. I guess hadn't ever heard of that proposal.

Quote[/b] ]
Additionally, we are declining ARRL’s request that Novice and Technician Class
licensees be given voice and image privileges in certain segments of the 80, 40, 15 and 10 m bands.

I was also unaware the ARRL wanted to give Technicians so much HF operating ability.

*disclaimer: this post is neither pro/con the whole "ba-humbug" feel of the FCC's new order.
I just find the whole thing interesting. Like it or not, it's definitely a major turning point for amateur radio and it will be interesting to see what comes of the change.
I wasn't in the hobby, but I'm guessing there was a lot of similar attitudes for the creation of the No-Code Tech and the change from faster speeds down to 5wpm for General and Extra. (although, maybe to a lesser extent.)
The ARRL has wanted this for a long time. After all, in theory it would help boost membership, and they're pushing amateur radio to kids a lot now. Nothing is wrong with getting kids interested, but to me it seems as though the ARRL is concentrating way too much on getting kids into the hobby.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (Kc5fog @ Dec. 20 2006,02:32)]Talk about cry babies and immature behavior I found where some group called "Federation for uncompromised proficiency" aka FED-UP put up a website calling for all hams that passed the code test to light up the "new" phone bands they claim were "stolen from them" with as much CW as possible in protest.

What does this reflect to new hams just coming into the hobby that hear then kind of tripe?

Change is inevitable and failure to adapt to change can often be much more dangerous and hazardous than the change itself.


Eric Kc5Fog
First of all, those "stolen bands" of which you speak were part of the Nov. 15 R&O, not the Dec. 19 one.

And those operating CW in the phone portion of the band wouldn't be in the wrong. You can operate CW virtually anywhere.

It's phone that's restricted, and rightfully so.

And would you blame them? They've been squeezed lower down into the band with more room made for an inefficient analog mode.

Is this really the 21st century? If anything, we should be making more room for DIGITAL modes such as CW, PSK, RTTY etc instead of taking away room from it.

[k7fd]

Quote[/b] (KE7JFA @ Dec. 19 2006,15:07)]Quote[/b] (k7fd @ Dec. 19 2006,14:11)]Don't forget abt straight key night!

73 K7FD
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

I knew this whole code thing would make babies out of all the old farts.
I resemble that comment! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Happy Holidays! John, K7FD

[k4wde]

Quote[/b] (K1VSK @ Dec. 19 2006,14:09)]Quote[/b] (K1VSK @ Dec. 19 2006,17:56)]After all these different threads on the subject, there clearly is nothing intelligent left to say either pro or con.

Any further comments serve only to demonstrate how oblivious you are!
not bad - 2 more in 5 minutes!
anyone else?
Why would anyone need to when you keep quoting yourself?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif?

[K4JF]

Quote[/b] (N5DUX @ Dec. 19 2006,03:11)]I was actually surprised about the ARRL wanting a new entry-level license. From the document, it looks like they were wanting a Jr.-ultra-intro license. I thought the No-code Tech was created in the early 90s for this reason.
They were looking for a real entry-level license. Simple, fast, limited time. Similar to the old Novice, which brought so many of us into this hobby/service, but without the code requirement.

The Tech is not that. It was designed for technical people (hence the name) to work VHF and above.

I think we do need a real entry-level license, and I don't think we need a Tech. Bring back a modern version of Novice, fold the Tech and General into one, and we would have a sensible license stucture again.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 19 2006,23:07)]Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. #Techs still have to upgrade to General. #And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. #I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI
You are slightly incorrect. Tech+ licensees do not receive anything extra. Tech no-codes get all the same privs as the Tech+ now so that means they get 10m voice and CW access to several of the HF bands. Novice class licensees will gain the same privs as Tech + so now they get full voice privs on VHF and UHF now where they only had voice on 220 before.

[k7fd]

One problem w/ dropping the cw requirement is that ham radio has lost it's 'trademark' so to speak. Merriam Webster defines a trademark as "a distinguishing characteristic or feature firmly associated with a person or thing..."

In the public's mind, Ham Radio and Morse Code went hand in hand. Having to know 'the code' has been our trademark for years. With that requirement behind us, what now will be our distinguishing characteristic? Your ideas and comments welcome!

Happy Holidays to all!

73 John K7FD

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,09:49)]Quote[/b] (Kc5fog @ Dec. 20 2006,02:32)]Talk about cry babies and immature behavior I found where some group called "Federation for uncompromised proficiency" aka FED-UP put up a website calling for all hams that passed the code test to light up the "new" phone bands they claim were "stolen from them" with as much CW as possible in protest.

What does this reflect to new hams just coming into the hobby that hear then kind of tripe?

Change is inevitable and failure to adapt to change can often be much more dangerous and hazardous than the change itself.


Eric Kc5Fog
First of all, those "stolen bands" of which you speak were part of the Nov. 15 R&O, not the Dec. 19 one. #

And those operating CW in the phone portion of the band wouldn't be in the wrong. #You can operate CW virtually anywhere.

It's phone that's restricted, and rightfully so.

And would you blame them? #They've been squeezed lower down into the band with more room made for an inefficient analog mode.

Is this really the 21st century? #If anything, we should be making more room for DIGITAL modes such as CW, PSK, RTTY etc instead of taking away room from it.
CW is not a digital mode. The term digital refers to two states. On or OFF. CW is not an on off mode. Yes you key the transmitter on or off but the lengths of the tones are what make CW what it is. With the two different lengths of tones and the spacing it does not qualify as being a digital mode.

[KB1SF]

Quote[/b] (n2knc @ Dec. 19 2006,15:17)]this is what all the lazy ass people wanted.
The R&O has been published. #The FCC has made their final decision on the matter.

Get over it. #

It's now time to move on.

73,

Keith
KB1SF / VA3KSF

[K1VSK]

If you can't get along in the sandbox children, you'll all have to go to your room.

[kc7gnm]

14. Based on our review of the record in the proceeding and on consideration of the various
comments on this issue, we believe that because the international requirement for telegraphy proficiency
has been eliminated, we should treat Morse code telegraphy as we do other communications techniques.
In this connection, we note that our Rules do not require individuals to pass a practical examination to
demonstrate some degree of proficiency in non-telegraphy communications techniques. Rather,
individuals demonstrate knowledge of other communication techniques and technical qualifications by
passing written examinations composed of questions that prove that the examinee possesses the
operational and technical qualifications required for the privileges authorized by the operator license.
We believe, therefore, that written examinations are sufficient to determine whether a person is qualified
to be issued an amateur radio operator license. Accordingly, we conclude that the public interest will best
be served by eliminating the telegraphy examination requirement as a separate examination requirement
in the amateur service. To achieve this result, we will amend Section 97.501 of our Rules to eliminate the
requirement that an individual demonstrate five wpm proficiency in telegraphy in order to qualify for a
General or Amateur Extra Class operator license.

This is cut straight out of the R&O. This is what most people cannot get through their heads. Morse is a mode. Since other modes are not afforded their own test why should morse code.

[W5GNB]

Now that the CODE is officially history, it is time to create yet another contest.

How about the "CB JAMBOREE CONTEST"?? I am sure the ARRL would be happy to be the Proud sponsor.

The exchange could be "Hey Good Buddy, Your TEN-EIGHT and TREE TOP TALL"

Let's also not forget extra points for the Loudest Power Mic, Noise toys, and the Most DIRTY amplifier!

It would be most appropiate to replace the Straight Key Night contest!!

[K3UD]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:18)]Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 19 2006,23:07)]Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. Techs still have to upgrade to General. And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI
You are slightly incorrect. Tech+ licensees do not receive anything extra. Tech no-codes get all the same privs as the Tech+ now so that means they get 10m voice and CW access to several of the HF bands. Novice class licensees will gain the same privs as Tech + so now they get full voice privs on VHF and UHF now where they only had voice on 220 before.
I don't think that Novices get anything out of this. It would have made sense to equalize the Novice, Tech and Tech+ in terms of privileges but I just did not see this in the FCC's Report and Order.

Did I miss this or is this an interpretation of some of the language in the R&O?


73
George
K3UD

[kc7gnm]

Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Dec. 20 2006,08:02)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:18)]Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 19 2006,23:07)]Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. Techs still have to upgrade to General. And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI
You are slightly incorrect. Tech+ licensees do not receive anything extra. Tech no-codes get all the same privs as the Tech+ now so that means they get 10m voice and CW access to several of the HF bands. Novice class licensees will gain the same privs as Tech + so now they get full voice privs on VHF and UHF now where they only had voice on 220 before.
I don't think that Novices get anything out of this. It would have made sense to equalize the Novice, Tech and Tech+ in terms of privileges but I just did not see this in the FCC's Report and Order.

Did I miss this or is this an interpretation of some of the language in the R&O?


73
George
K3UD
Novices get nothing new. I don't know where this is coming from. I see so much disinformation on the web about so many things that I am reluctant to believe anything I see.

Joe

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (W5GNB @ Dec. 20 2006,10:59)]Now that the CODE is officially history, it is time to create yet another contest.

How about the "CB JAMBOREE CONTEST"?? #I am sure the ARRL would be happy to be the Proud sponsor.

The exchange could be "Hey Good Buddy, Your TEN-EIGHT and TREE TOP TALL"

Let's also not forget extra points for the Loudest Power Mic, Noise toys, and the Most DIRTY amplifier!

It would be most appropiate to replace the Straight Key Night contest!!
Apparently you are very misinformed. Morse code is not history. The testing of Morse is history. I bolded that so you might be able to understand that. Apparently you have no clue what this R&O means. I will make note of your callsign and be sure that I will never talk to you on the air if you feel like this. Get a clue. Morse code will still be used on the bands just not tested.

[WA4RYW]

Quote[/b] (k8mhz @ Dec. 19 2006,18:54)]Well, here are the results of the dropping of the test so far....my how news travels.

I am aware of 8 people that are now interested in getting their ham licenses and only so because of the dropping of the code impediment. #7 broadcast engineers (one a chief engineer for a network station) and an engineering professor at the University of California, Irvine.

So far I know of NO CB'ers that suddenly want to be hams.

It appears to me that the FCC did the right thing.
One will typically not find your rank and file CBer in the social circles you seem to be hanging out with. Engineering professors don't normally "boot scoot" with the freeband culture. I'm skeptical that your polling methods may fall short of accepted scientific standards and procedures.

[K4JF]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 19 2006,09:09)]Novices get nothing new. I don't know where this is coming from. I see so much disinformation on the web about so many things that I am reluctant to believe anything I see.

Joe
I just reread the order and the above is correct. #There is no change coming in the Novice privileges. #None. #I don't know where it is coming from either. #No change in Novice, guys. #The only change in operating privileges is for the Technician license. #No others are affected. #Period.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 20 2006,11:09)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Dec. 20 2006,08:02)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:18)]Quote[/b] (N3JI @ Dec. 19 2006,23:07)]Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,20:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
None. #Techs still have to upgrade to General. #And if you want to bypass the code test, you have to wait for 30 days after the R&O is recorded in the register. #I read earlier that the date is looking like around Valentine's Day, I believe.

Joe, N3JI
You are slightly incorrect. Tech+ licensees do not receive anything extra. Tech no-codes get all the same privs as the Tech+ now so that means they get 10m voice and CW access to several of the HF bands. Novice class licensees will gain the same privs as Tech + so now they get full voice privs on VHF and UHF now where they only had voice on 220 before.
I don't think that Novices get anything out of this. It would have made sense to equalize the Novice, Tech and Tech+ in terms of privileges but I just did not see this in the FCC's Report and Order.

Did I miss this or is this an interpretation of some of the language in the R&O?


73
George
K3UD
Novices get nothing new. I don't know where this is coming from. I see so much disinformation on the web about so many things that I am reluctant to believe anything I see.

Joe
I stand corrected. You are correct.

[WA4RYW]

Quote[/b] (KI6HAV @ Dec. 20 2006,00:21)]I hope it puts a lot more people on the air for me to contact and more money for Radio Manufacturers so I Can have Better Cheaper Radio's and more money for the FCC so they can police the bands better . I can spin my dial now and not hear a sole sometimes. I think that is what this change is about.
You're at the absolute bottom of the sunspot cycle. The higher bands will be dead as a hammer for the most part, irrespective of the amount of hams we flood the bands with. wait five or six years. Those bands will be hopping again, flood or not.

[W5ROY]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif Yes i voted to keep the code requirement!!! My XYL has tried many times to learn the code , but to no avail. It is about time she gets a break, and gets something for her efforts. No big talk on the chicken band here about getting into ham radio. Lets put it to bed and quit beating a dead horse.

ARRL VE 73 Welcome new hams

de W5ROY Roy

[kg4kww]

Lets put this code / no code thing to rest it's over, live with it.

Accept the fact we are all GOOD BUDDIES now!!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I read the R&O and this is good.

Merry Christmas to all

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,07:39)]CW is not a digital mode. The term digital refers to two states. On or OFF. CW is not an on off mode. Yes you key the transmitter on or off but the lengths of the tones are what make CW what it is. With the two different lengths of tones and the spacing it does not qualify as being a digital mode.
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!

Quote[/b] ]GNM: Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false.

Yep, see above.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,10:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
This doesn't prove anything else other than the FCC doesn't think that code keeps bad apples out. The R&O is a decision by the FCC, not the absolute truth.

[ky1v]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
Wait...so, if the government states it [opinion], then it must be true?

LMAO

[ky5u]

Exact new NCT privleges when rules go into effect:

CW ONLY
80M - 3.525 to 3.600 MHz
40M - 7.025 to 7.125 MHz
15M - 21.025 to 21.200 MHz

CW, RTTY AND DATA
10M - 28.000 to 28.300 MHz

CW AND SSB PHONE
10M - 28.300 to 28.500 MHz

And remember you're limited to 200W.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:39)]CW is not a digital mode.
CW is 100% a digital mode.

Quote[/b] ] The term digital refers to two states. On or OFF.

Wrong. The term binary refers to two states. Digital doesn't have to be binary. Digital simply means that discrete values with finite resolution are used instead of a continuous spectrum with infinite resolution(analog).

Quote[/b] ] CW is not an on off mode. Yes you key the transmitter on or off but the lengths of the tones are what make CW what it is. With the two different lengths of tones and the spacing it does not qualify as being a digital mode.

LAWL!

Dit = 0, Dah =1 (or vice versa).

There you go, digital mode.

CW bears a striking resemblance to ASCII or EBCDIC, where characters are represented by fixed numerical values.

But by your logic, RTTY, PSK and Packet aren't digital modes either, because they use tones to represent 1's and 0's and don't simply key the transmitter on and off.

[K8MHZ]

Quote[/b] ]Just how many CBers do you know, Mark? #And of those, how many did you ask?

I assume all of the others you mention got the information about the rules changes directly from you, with the popped question.


Many of the CBers know me from the Tech Classes I teach. #I had one young man start the class a couple years ago that quit once he found out that it was illegal to QRM people, or 'drop the hammer' on them as he called it. #He was interested because of the higher power we were allowed to run.

The broadcast folks heard it through the news. #The professor had just e-mailed me a couple weeks ago and told me he has been interested in ham radio for 40 years but refused to learn the code. #I tried to explain that the Techs did not need the code. #He didn't want to be restricted to the lowest level. #As soon as I heard about the code test being dropped I told him about it. #He was really excited.

I don't make a habit of conversing with CBers as I can't tolerate the filthy language. #My e-mail address is available to them as it is passed out with the information on the Tech classes. #The only new interest I have seen comes from people that would make great operators.

I am writing a piece about the new rules for our local paper, The Muskegon Chronicle, so in a few days our entire city will know what has happened. #The editor I am working with is very excited about the news. #He learned Morse Code as a part of Scouting.

Actually, Lee, the editor asked if I could come up with an alternative view of dropping the test. #If you wanted to write something worth publishing in a newspaper I may be able to arrange it. #So far much the stuff I have read here expressing discontent about the new ruling is not fit to print in our paper. # Remember, 99.6 percent of the people reading the paper won't be hams. #Some don't even know what ham radio is. #The girl that at that answers the phone for the Chronicle is one of them #I would guess that almost 1/4 of our population does not know our hobby exists.

That is all about to change.....

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (ky1v @ Dec. 20 2006,10:52)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
Wait...so, if the government states it [opinion], then it must be true?

LMAO
If the Government always speaks the truth, why are we wasting so much taxpayer dollars with the justice system?

[w6em]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 19 2006,10:47)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,10:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
This doesn't prove anything else other than the FCC doesn't think that code keeps bad apples out. #The R&O is a decision by the FCC, not the absolute truth.
The real test will be whether or not we hear "echo boxes" and "beeps" all over the phone bands.

Maybe we'll end up with channelized bands after all. #Its a much simpler transition that way.

But, in the strictest sense, the record does reflect some notorious bad apples that did pass the code test. Murderers, thieves, master spies and con artists. So, guess the code wasn't that great as a filter.


#
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[K8MHZ]

Quote[/b] ]One will typically not find your rank and file CBer in the social circles you seem to be hanging out with. Engineering professors don't normally "boot scoot" with the freeband culture. I'm skeptical that your polling methods may fall short of accepted scientific standards and procedures.

No polling techniques were employed at all. #This is simply a statement of my personal experience.

Has yours differed? #Have people that are CB operators approached you?

Actually, once the article I am writing hits our local paper I think there may just be some interest from CB operators. #There may just be some people out there that started on CB and are sick and tired of the low lifes there and want something better. #If they want to join our ranks, follow the rules, learn and contribute to our hobby I welcome them and will gladly teach them.

How about you?

[K8MHZ]

Quote[/b] ]The real test will be whether or not we hear "echo boxes" and "beeps" all over the phone bands.


If that happens the person doing it will also be sending their call sign, hence their ID.

It is up to us to Elmer them and politely explain that we don't use such features on ham radio.

That is if it even becomes a problem. I doubt it will.

[ky1v]

Quote[/b] (w6em @ Dec. 20 2006,09:59)]Quote[/b] ]The real test will be whether or not we hear "echo boxes" and "beeps" all over the phone bands.
I have a secret weapon for any of those that wish to use "echo boxes" and "roger beeps" on the ham bands...

http://www.ky1v.com/40m.jpg

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (ky1v @ Dec. 20 2006,11:52)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
Wait...so, if the government states it [opinion], then it must be true?

LMAO
And I suppose a few old farts saying it is true we are supposed to believe them? I believe the FCC has more data than a bunch of old farts whining about the dropping of morse code testing.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,11:58)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:39)]CW is not a digital mode.
CW is 100% a digital mode.

Quote[/b] ] The term digital refers to two states. On or OFF.

Wrong. #The term binary refers to two states. #Digital doesn't have to be binary. #Digital simply means that discrete values with finite resolution are used instead of a continuous spectrum with infinite resolution(analog). #

Quote[/b] ] CW is not an on off mode. Yes you key the transmitter on or off but the lengths of the tones are what make CW what it is. With the two different lengths of tones and the spacing it does not qualify as being a digital mode.

LAWL!

Dit = 0, Dah =1 (or vice versa).

There you go, digital mode.

CW bears a striking resemblance to ASCII or EBCDIC, where characters are represented by fixed numerical values.

But by your logic, RTTY, PSK and Packet aren't digital modes either, because they use tones to represent 1's and 0's and don't simply key the transmitter on and off.
You forgot one important issue with CW. The spaceing. Because of that added bit of information it does not qualify as a digital mode. CW has Three states not two.

[w6em]

Quote[/b] (k8mhz @ Dec. 19 2006,10:58)][I am writing a piece about the new rules for our local paper, The Muskegon Chronicle, so in a few days our entire city will know what has happened. #The editor I am working with is very excited about the news. #He learned Morse Code as a part of Scouting.

Actually, Lee, the editor asked if I could come up with an alternative view of dropping the test. #If you wanted to write something worth publishing in a newspaper I may be able to arrange it. #So far much the stuff I have read here expressing discontent about the new ruling is not fit to print in our paper. # Remember, 99.6 percent of the people reading the paper won't be hams. #Some don't even know what ham radio is. #The girl that at that answers the phone for the Chronicle is one of them #I would guess that almost 1/4 of our population does not know our hobby exists.

That is all about to change.....
Mark: #Hard to really quantify a reason to not drop it as a requirement. #I'm not a CW lover. #But, I do appreciate tradition and history. #I guess, though, CW isn't in the same category as religion. #Although, what we hear from some here really places it close to Godliness.

Short of tapping two bare ends of wires together, knocking on a sealed door, or a drain pipe to send the famous series "S-O-S" when no other means of communicating an emergency is available, I can't think of a really good reason. #The deaths of several folks in the West in frigid surroundings wouldn't have been affected if any of them knew the code. #If one or more were hams, well, any mode would have worked, if they had their gear with them and it worked, I suppose. Although, tapping out S-O-S on a car horn could probably have been done for a really long time......

Could someone copy makeshift CW on an FM-only receiver from someone in a crisis who could only manage to short together two wires of a mike cord? #Hard to say. #Most definitely not through a repeater. #Perhaps, though, from a downed aircraft. #But, ELTs do a reasonably good job of marking their spot.

And, as has been said much earlier, ships no longer monitor LF frequencies as a rule and most coast stations in other countries do not.

Guess its like an obsession with antiques. #You admire the items. #Seek them out. #Keep them in great shape, and use them every once in a while to appreciate them for what they were.

Good luck with your article.

73,

[w8esp]

I,m an old F I guess. Took the class B in 1939 at the FCC. The idea was to promote electronics interest to young persons. It took math, ohms law ac knowledge and so on. How many of todays hams can tell you inductive or cap. reactence? It has turned into strickly an operators test. The FCC will soon see no reason for the ham bands next. They many be right!

[ky1v]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,10:22)]Quote[/b] (ky1v @ Dec. 20 2006,11:52)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
Wait...so, if the government states it [opinion], then it must be true?

LMAO
And I suppose a few old farts saying it is true we are supposed to believe them? I believe the FCC has more data than a bunch of old farts whining about the dropping of morse code testing.
Did I type that? Show me where I typed that.

Besides, who says everyone of the opinion morse testing should remain is old?

You seem to make many assumptions and generalizations!

Still LMAO!

Quite frankly, I don't care how many CB'ers join ham radio, as long as they are giving me 59's in the next contest!

And when they squeeze more of the CW sub band to make room for them, we'll operate the CW contests in the phone band...won't that be a hoot!!!

[w6em]

Quote[/b] (w8esp @ Dec. 19 2006,11:30)]It took math, ohms law ac knowledge and so on. How many of todays hams can tell you inductive or cap. reactence?
At least on the year 2000 version of the Extra exam, there were plenty of impedance questions that required some knowledge of complex algebra to solve. Including conversion from rectangular to polar (magnitude and phase angle).

If those have all been eliminated since then, you may be right.

I suspect, though, that theory tests will get a bit tougher. They should. Especially for the Extra Class.
With all of the digital modulation techniques and such, there should be much more on system theory than there has been.

Also, some decent circuit analysis as well, instead of just identifying devices by their symbol. That's an insult.

I agree about the operating part, though. Just memorizing a bunch of semi-useless propagation and ionization layer cr*p and when the moon is at "pedigree" :-) is a complete waste. The useless operator stuff shouldn't be on tests, unless its how to make adjustments to or tune a transmitter, a tuner, or a linear amplifier. That's operating information worth testing.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,11:24)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,11:58)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:39)]CW is not a digital mode.
CW is 100% a digital mode.

Quote[/b] ] The term digital refers to two states. On or OFF.

Wrong. The term binary refers to two states. Digital doesn't have to be binary. Digital simply means that discrete values with finite resolution are used instead of a continuous spectrum with infinite resolution(analog).

Quote[/b] ] CW is not an on off mode. Yes you key the transmitter on or off but the lengths of the tones are what make CW what it is. With the two different lengths of tones and the spacing it does not qualify as being a digital mode.

LAWL!

Dit = 0, Dah =1 (or vice versa).

There you go, digital mode.

CW bears a striking resemblance to ASCII or EBCDIC, where characters are represented by fixed numerical values.

But by your logic, RTTY, PSK and Packet aren't digital modes either, because they use tones to represent 1's and 0's and don't simply key the transmitter on and off.
You forgot one important issue with CW. The spaceing. Because of that added bit of information it does not qualify as a digital mode. CW has Three states not two.
Again, wrong.

Even if there are three states, so what? Still digital. Digital simply means that discrete values are used to represent information. It has nothing to do with 1's or 0's.

That third space you're talking about is simply that, a space. It can be likened to a timebase, a clock if you may, that just keeps track of what time things happened. The characters are still only made up of dits and dahs (1's and 0's). Digital modes can and will have spacing as well. They just occur along different parts of the timebase so that the computer (or your brain) can distinguish one character from another.


So CW is still 100% digital, no matter how you try to ignore that fact.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (w8esp @ Dec. 20 2006,11:30)]I,m an old F I guess. Took the class B in 1939 at the FCC. The idea was to promote electronics interest to young persons. It took math, ohms law ac knowledge and so on. How many of todays hams can tell you inductive or cap. reactence? It has turned into strickly an operators test. The FCC will soon see no reason for the ham bands next. They many be right!
Some hams today can't even tell the difference between digital and analog either!

LAWL!

[WA3KYY]

Quote[/b] (kd5vjn @ Dec. 19 2006,21:58)]OK i would like someone to cut through the jibberish. what are the new bands if any that techs recieve
3.525-3.600 CW only 200W only
7.025-7.100 CW only 200W only
21.025-21.200 CW only 200W only
28.0-28.3 CW/data/RTTY 200W only
28.3-28.5 CW/SSB 200W only

[wr1tx]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,10:47)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,10:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
This doesn't prove anything else other than the FCC doesn't think that code keeps bad apples out. #The R&O is a decision by the FCC, not the absolute truth.
Oh, but it really IS the absolute truth. Just listen to 75 meters at night anytime for example and you'll see why. The R&O comment also shows that the FCC is fully aware of what is going on in that particular subband. But what they'll do about it is anybody's guess.

And yes, I've heard over and over and over that the code keeps out the bad apples. I've heard it on the air and read it here on QRZ, eHam, and many other forums. I've even heard it at some club meetings and hamfests. Now we know it's just a myth that got busted big time, thanks to the FCC.

The thought that the code kept out the bad apples was truly B.S. I'd like to hear something better now from the OF gang now.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,12:45)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,11:24)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,11:58)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:39)]CW is not a digital mode.
CW is 100% a digital mode.

Quote[/b] ] The term digital refers to two states. On or OFF.

Wrong. #The term binary refers to two states. #Digital doesn't have to be binary. #Digital simply means that discrete values with finite resolution are used instead of a continuous spectrum with infinite resolution(analog). #

Quote[/b] ] CW is not an on off mode. Yes you key the transmitter on or off but the lengths of the tones are what make CW what it is. With the two different lengths of tones and the spacing it does not qualify as being a digital mode.

LAWL!

Dit = 0, Dah =1 (or vice versa).

There you go, digital mode.

CW bears a striking resemblance to ASCII or EBCDIC, where characters are represented by fixed numerical values.

But by your logic, RTTY, PSK and Packet aren't digital modes either, because they use tones to represent 1's and 0's and don't simply key the transmitter on and off.
You forgot one important issue with CW. The spaceing. Because of that added bit of information it does not qualify as a digital mode. CW has Three states not two.
Again, wrong.

Even if there are three states, so what? Still digital. #Digital simply means that discrete values are used to represent information. #It has nothing to do with 1's or 0's.

That third space you're talking about is simply that, a space. #It can be likened to a timebase, a clock if you may, that just keeps track of what time things happened. #The characters are still only made up of dits and dahs (1's and 0's). Digital modes can and will have spacing as well. #They just occur along different parts of the timebase so that the computer (or your brain) can distinguish one character from another.


So CW is still 100% digital, no matter how you try to ignore that fact.
And you are totally wrong. You even said digital modes have 2 states. CW has 3. Try to decode CW without the spacing put in. It would be impossible. Digital modes such as psk31 and packet do not have spacing because they have uniform data lengths.

CW is not and never will be digital. Get that through your head.

[KC8URV]

Rules change not all are great you guys sound like the old man who cried because they installed a stop sign at the end of his street. The rules have changed many times over the years and always someone wants to know why. can't we move on or should we all find a cave and club. I spent 18 years in the military when I first joined we used AM offshore and everything on shore was teletype and the day the teletype was replaced by the computer I near danced on the desk when we got radar the old RDF loop came off the boat's I was again overjoyed but there were old timers that cried they didn't know what the world was comming to (A BETTER PLACE) just like ham is move on stop the name calling it does no good it shure woun't make the club meetings any better.
Plain English get over it !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (wr1tx @ Dec. 20 2006,12:49)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,10:47)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,10:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
This doesn't prove anything else other than the FCC doesn't think that code keeps bad apples out. #The R&O is a decision by the FCC, not the absolute truth.
Oh, but it really IS the absolute truth. Just listen to 75 meters at night anytime for example and you'll see why. The R&O comment also shows that the FCC is fully aware of what is going on in that particular subband. But what they'll do about it is anybody's guess.

And yes, I've heard over and over and over that the code keeps out the bad apples. I've heard it on the air and read it here on QRZ, eHam, and many other forums. I've even heard it at some club meetings and hamfests. Now we know it's just a myth that got busted big time, thanks to the FCC.

The thought that the code kept out the bad apples was truly B.S. I'd like to hear something better now from the OF gang now.
The problem is the OF's want to continue the myth that CW is a filter for bad apples. We all know the FCC busted that bubble big time in yesterdays R&O. Besides look at where most of the violations occur. Remember Baxter? He was the biggest lid of all time and the FCC got him. Plenty of other Extras and Generals that have gotten caught by the FCC so the R&O was correct in saying that the CW being a filter argument was bogus.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (KC8URV @ Dec. 20 2006,12:57)]Rules change not all are great you guys sound like the old man who cried because they installed a stop sign at the end of his street. The rules have changed many times over the years and always someone wants to know why. can't we move on or should we all find a cave and club. I spent 18 years in the military when I first joined we used AM offshore and everything on shore was teletype and the day the teletype was replaced by the computer I near danced on the desk when we got radar the old RDF loop came off the boat's I was #again overjoyed but there were old timers that cried they didn't know what the world was comming to (A BETTER PLACE) just like ham is move on stop the name calling it does no good it shure woun't make the club meetings any better.
# #Plain English get over it !!!!!!!!!!!!!
The biggest problem is all these OF's that keep saying if I had to do it then they should too. Well I had to do it too but I do not mind them changing the rules. Does not bother me one bit. Will give me plenty more people to talk to especially since I don't think I want to even talk to these elitest OF's anymore. If you can't deal with change then go find a new hobby. Ham Radio is all about changes and new ideas. Old ideas are what is killing this hobby and making commericial interests want to take up our spectrum. Ham radio used to be out front in inovation but now it is so far behind because of the road blocks we may never catch back up and may never even take the lead again.

[W5PJW]

[]I think we should have a 15 WPM code test for General Class and 20 WPM for Extra Class and stop all this BS about no code....You should have to work to get a ticket not just have it handed to you....We are fast going to be CBers...The ARRL should shut up and stay out of it...
I have said my say now I'll shut up...

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,11:53)]And you are totally wrong. You even said digital modes have 2 states. CW has 3. Try to decode CW without the spacing put in. It would be impossible. Digital modes such as psk31 and packet do not have spacing because they have uniform data lengths.

CW is not and never will be digital. Get that through your head.
I never said that digital modes have two states.

I said that binary modes do.

Digital modes can be binary, or they can have any different number of states.

Digital means one or more discrete states. It has nothing to do with 1's or 0's.

And that fictitious third state you speak of is nonexistant. It is simply a time base upon which the digital signal uses as a reference in the time domain.

But you can continue to wallow in your ignorance. Not my loss. I know I'm right. I know you're not.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (W5PJW @ Dec. 20 2006,13:22)][]I think we should have a 15 WPM code test for General Class and 20 WPM for Extra Class and stop all this BS about no code....You should have to work to get a ticket not just have it handed to you....We are fast going to be CBers...The ARRL should shut up and stay out of it...
I have said my say now I'll shut up...
Well that just is not going to happen so get over it and accept the changes.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:53)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,12:45)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,11:24)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,11:58)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,09:39)]CW is not a digital mode.
CW is 100% a digital mode.

Quote[/b] ] The term digital refers to two states. On or OFF.

Wrong. The term binary refers to two states. Digital doesn't have to be binary. Digital simply means that discrete values with finite resolution are used instead of a continuous spectrum with infinite resolution(analog).

Quote[/b] ] CW is not an on off mode. Yes you key the transmitter on or off but the lengths of the tones are what make CW what it is. With the two different lengths of tones and the spacing it does not qualify as being a digital mode.

LAWL!

Dit = 0, Dah =1 (or vice versa).

There you go, digital mode.

CW bears a striking resemblance to ASCII or EBCDIC, where characters are represented by fixed numerical values.

But by your logic, RTTY, PSK and Packet aren't digital modes either, because they use tones to represent 1's and 0's and don't simply key the transmitter on and off.
You forgot one important issue with CW. The spaceing. Because of that added bit of information it does not qualify as a digital mode. CW has Three states not two.
Again, wrong.

Even if there are three states, so what? Still digital. Digital simply means that discrete values are used to represent information. It has nothing to do with 1's or 0's.

That third space you're talking about is simply that, a space. It can be likened to a timebase, a clock if you may, that just keeps track of what time things happened. The characters are still only made up of dits and dahs (1's and 0's). Digital modes can and will have spacing as well. They just occur along different parts of the timebase so that the computer (or your brain) can distinguish one character from another.


So CW is still 100% digital, no matter how you try to ignore that fact.
And you are totally wrong. You even said digital modes have 2 states. CW has 3. Try to decode CW without the spacing put in. It would be impossible. Digital modes such as psk31 and packet do not have spacing because they have uniform data lengths.

CW is not and never will be digital. Get that through your head.
MH is right. CW is a digital mode. We don't think of it that way since it can be sent and decoded manually, without a computer.

The "third state" in any serial data mode is the timing. This reflects itself in CW through the spacing and the length of the dits and dahs. ASCII and PSK31 have this same timing issue. In PSK, it is fixed. In ASCII, it is variable, depending on the baud rate. In CW, it is totally variable, depending on the speed at which code is being sent.

If you can send it with ones and zeroes, it is digital (or in this case binary). If a string of data was coming across the screen, and it looked like this, would you recognize it?

000101010001110111011100010101000000

If we turned those "ones" into a tone, and fed this into a tone generator at 10bps, we would here "SOS" sent in code, at some speed. At 20bps, it would still work, just be twice as fast.

Joe

[ky1v]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,10:58)]Quote[/b] (wr1tx @ Dec. 20 2006,12:49)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 20 2006,10:47)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,10:06)]Here is another quote fromt he R&O that really negates the arguments all the old farts talk about.

As noted in the record, the claim “that code requirements help eliminate “bad apples” from the radio hobby has not proven correct in the past and is not a viable argument for the present, or future

This shows that all these guys talking about code keeping the bad apples out are false. I would think the FCC would know more about violations than most of the OF that think they know.
This doesn't prove anything else other than the FCC doesn't think that code keeps bad apples out. #The R&O is a decision by the FCC, not the absolute truth.
Oh, but it really IS the absolute truth. Just listen to 75 meters at night anytime for example and you'll see why. The R&O comment also shows that the FCC is fully aware of what is going on in that particular subband. But what they'll do about it is anybody's guess.

And yes, I've heard over and over and over that the code keeps out the bad apples. I've heard it on the air and read it here on QRZ, eHam, and many other forums. I've even heard it at some club meetings and hamfests. Now we know it's just a myth that got busted big time, thanks to the FCC.

The thought that the code kept out the bad apples was truly B.S. I'd like to hear something better now from the OF gang now.
The problem is the OF's want to continue the myth that CW is a filter for bad apples. We all know the FCC busted that bubble big time in yesterdays R&O. Besides look at where most of the violations occur. Remember Baxter? He was the biggest lid of all time and the FCC got him. Plenty of other Extras and Generals that have gotten caught by the FCC so the R&O was correct in saying that the CW being a filter argument was bogus.
It's not just OF's Greg. I wanted code testing to remain too and I am only 5 years older than you.

You see, the argument that 80 meters is indicative that CW testing as a filter is a myth, in itself is flawed.

This isn't just about morse testing. It is about the complete dumbing down of the Amateur Service.

Removing the code is simply the last step in the dumbing down process.

The first step was allowing Amateurs to test themselves.

The next step was distributing the exact questions and corresponding answers to those tests.

The next step was thinking amateurs could police themselves. That was the dumbest thing the FCC ever did. How can Amateurs police themselves when they have no authority to enforce with consequences?

Now, here we are at the final phase in the FCC's insane plan to deregulate the Amateur Service and you wonder why long time Amateurs are upset?

I can assure you of one thing, 30 years ago, my parents could turn me loose on the HF phone bands without worrying about me hearing a plethora of cursing. Today? It is common place. Not just on 80 meters either. I can't tune 20 meters with my 4 or 5 year old daughters on my lap without some knucklehead saying "damn", ####", "hell", "bastard" or "bitch". It is an embarrassment to the Amateur Service and the public in general.

But heck, these are good operators right? We need them in Amateur radio because the bands are dead and the newcomers are too stupid to a) realize it's the bottom of the sunspot cycle and b) CALLING CQ may get an answer? No, instead, the new comers would rather interrupt my conversation hollering "BREAK" when they can't even hear the party I am speaking too! But heck, these operators having something valuable to contribute right?

Are some of us “OF's” upset? You bet we are!!!!

So Greg, this isn't about morse testing! The issue is clearly about removing "effort" [the last effort] from the requirement that was once a "filter" for keeping the general public from getting into the Amateur Service!

So be it...I have the ultimate lid filters! A VFO and an ON/OFF switch!

See you on HF soon.

David ~ KY1V

[ad4mg]

KC7GNM,

I've seen you state several times that "the biggest problem is .....".

Very briefly, I am a 20 wpm extra who operates primarily cw. #I look forward to hearing from the new operators who will soon grace the mf & hf bands.

But as I see it, I think the biggest problem is people like you who have to be "in your face" about this. #Why not shut your pie-hole before you turn many like myself off to the notion of welcoming our new operators? #If you have something positive to add, please do so, but your hate filled, "in your face" drivel is growing old quickly.

Of course, if you are incapable of #extracting your cranium from the orifice in which it resides, please continue. #You can be ignored.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ Dec. 20 2006,12:02)]Quote[/b] (KC8URV @ Dec. 20 2006,12:57)]Rules change not all are great you guys sound like the old man who cried because they installed a stop sign at the end of his street. The rules have changed many times over the years and always someone wants to know why. can't we move on or should we all find a cave and club. I spent 18 years in the military when I first joined we used AM offshore and everything on shore was teletype and the day the teletype was replaced by the computer I near danced on the desk when we got radar the old RDF loop came off the boat's I was again overjoyed but there were old timers that cried they didn't know what the world was comming to (A BETTER PLACE) just like ham is move on stop the name calling it does no good it shure woun't make the club meetings any better.
Plain English get over it !!!!!!!!!!!!!
The biggest problem is all these OF's that keep saying if I had to do it then they should too. Well I had to do it too but I do not mind them changing the rules. Does not bother me one bit. Will give me plenty more people to talk to especially since I don't think I want to even talk to these elitest OF's anymore. If you can't deal with change then go find a new hobby. Ham Radio is all about changes and new ideas. Old ideas are what is killing this hobby and making commericial interests want to take up our spectrum. Ham radio used to be out front in inovation but now it is so far behind because of the road blocks we may never catch back up and may never even take the lead again.
I am also not an OF, unless you consider 28 years to be old.

I also deal with a lot of innovative, new things both professionally and as part of my other hobbies (home theater, photography etc).

[kc7gnm]

David,

You said:

I can assure you of one thing, 30 years ago, my parents could turn me loose on the HF phone bands without worrying about me hearing a plethora of cursing. Today? It is common place. Not just on 80 meters either. I can't tune 20 meters with my 4 or 5 year old daughters on my lap without some knucklehead saying "damn", ####", "hell", "bastard" or "bitch". It is an embarrassment to the Amateur Service and the public in general.



True but these are the same guys that already