A question for our American chums

[G1ZFS]

Gentlemen

I am a big fan of the usa, I have spent time there with my own armed forces, been attached to yours, and visit now as a civvie for work.

I like your culture very much, and was taught one of the biggest lessons I have ever learnt in life at the hands of you americans.

The lesson was, its who you are, not what you do that makes the person.

Over here, if you are a waitress, people look down on you, over there if you are a waitress, thats what you do not who you are.

So with this in mind, why do you seem to want to keep the morse code testing as the be all and end all of hf access ?

It isnt required any more for legal reasons.
You could find you have lots of new chums to chat to, which is what at least half the hobby is about.

I saw a comment on here by W5ALT, that maybe it should be included in the testing but not be the be all and end all of it.

I've asked this question in several topics, but never recieved an answer as to why certain members of the usa ham radio community actually want to keep it.

I'm ready for the stick !!

Best Wishes

Nigel G1ZFS

The Morse code is a viable and usable means of communications, period.

[G1ZFS]

K7PIG

Thankyou for posting, and I totally concour.

It is absolutely a viable comms method, I've never thought or stated otherwise.

Why do you consider, if indeed you do consider it, neccesary as an absolute method for entry to hf comms?

Best Wishes

Nigel G1ZFS

[ka5s]

Hullo, Nigel,

CW has been a part of Amateur Radio from its beginning, and now, though perhaps no longer necessary, it is an art whose preservation has, for that and other reasons, considerable appeal. #

Think of schools' not requiring legible handwriting. It is true that one need not write much by hand these days if he chooses. However, it is a skill we still require students to learn. #Abandoning it would require a lot of arguing to and fro, and arouse considerable passion among parties to the debate.

It also appears that for some of us, the debate (or, maybe wrangle, tussle, hubbub, or fight) #is more important than its subject.


Cortland

[kb9ax]

Nigel,

Nice to see your post. I understand you statement concerning class awareness. I did much of my post grad study at Trinity College in Dublin, and spent several years working in the UK.

I have a post on this board titled "So much fuss over CW" you are welcome to read it and post any comments. But you are correct. To many from the outside, it appears like it’s just a CW .vs. No CW debate. but its much deeper then that. I could go into the reasoning that I have read on this board, but most of it just doesn’t make sense. The real debate many have is whether CW is a viable mode, and if it makes a good filter for entrance to the ham radio community. We have witnessed big changes in our society during the last couple decades and many of them are not for the better. The pendulum is still swinging, but Americans are really robust lot, so we will survive this change as well. We all know that cw will be dropped as a universal requirement to HF. At the same time we need to be cautious to not allow the mode to just die. So quite a few of us just want to come up with a way to guarantee we don’t loose the knowledge or pool of talent skilled in this mode.

As for the other side of the debate, we are afraid of HF sounding like our 11 meter citizens band. NO one has the correct answer yet. Like I tell my young engineers when they are first starting out “Anyone can solve a problem by creating another problem of equal or greater magnitude” A real solution requires both Wisdom and Knowledge and this debate is a good case in point. I don’t really think it’s the code that will make the difference. As you point out in your post, it’s our respect for each other regardless of class and background that has made us who we are, and that may be the real trait that also saves our hobby.

Thanks again for a nice post.

Dan KB9AX

[ae4fa]

Hi again, Nigel

I do enjoy your posts - usually well reasoned and thought out.

Can't speak for everybody, but I will give you my perspective. First, as you well know, our written exams are a joke. Yours are far superior in evaluating a candidate's theoretical knowledge. I have been especially impressed by the practical knowledge assessments that are required before one even qualifies to sit for a written exam. We have nothing like that here.

While your neither the syllabus, questions, nor answers for your top exam are published, ours are. Just a matter if ingestion and regurgitation with no real understanding of the underlying principles.

Given that situation, code testing is the only way we have to separate the sheep from the goats. It is, as I imagine you would say, a sad state of affairs, indeed!

A small group of us has been working for the past 6 or 7 weeks on a project to at least improve the situation. It is now out to some selected reviewers for their comments.

The basic purposes of our Amateur Radio Service, as stated in 47CFR97, as recently stated by the FCC, are to "provide an incentive for amateur radio operators to advance their communication and technical skills, and to encourage individuals in the Amateur Service to become trained operators, technicians, and electronic experts.”

Our current system does not even pretend to adequately evaluate a license candidate's preparedness.

In summary, I must say we have been short-sighted and ill-advised in continuing this travesty.

By and large, I believe the vast majority of US hams would be willing to trade off the CW requirement for more comprehensive written exams.

A long post, but still only worth 2 cents.

[kb9ax]

Hi Robert,

Didn't want to just call you fa or something.

I agree with your point.

"Our current system does not even pretend to adequately evaluate a license candidate's preparedness."

I am not sure when the US started publishing its question pool along with answers. I know for Aircraft Pilot written tests the questions and multiple choice lists are published, but the answers are not. Many companies then take it on themselves to publish books with the answers added as a study guide.

I am glad to hear you and others are working on a “more rational” proposal then those presented to the FCC so far. Your insight on the differences between requirements for UK and the US are a good addition to this thread.

What many of us don’t remember is that the operation of our equipment on HF can have world wide effects. With the power levels we are allowed, our broad frequency allocations etc. any malfunction or mistuning of our equipment can have devastating effects. Just recently a MARS phone patch net frequency was rendered almost useless for days because of an errant digital mode transmitter located somewhere in Nova Scotia. It took the FCC a while to track it down and have the owner correct the problem. The need for adequate technical knowledge is as correct today as it has ever been. I agree that for some reason, our testing has not kept up with the needs. I can’t say I have seen any of the more recent tests, so I can’t speak from experience on the subject.

Dan KB9AX

[WA2ZDY]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ae4fa @ Aug. 16 2003,10:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">. . .

By and large, I believe the vast majority of US hams would be willing to trade off the CW requirement for more comprehensive written exams.

. . .[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Add me to that list. I have been against elimination of code proficiency exams only for the same reasons posted above. There is nothing else current applicants are tested on that is practical. Testing to see if they've memorised the answers is not a way of determining practical knowledge.

That said, there is little currently separating the amateur service from certain others. The code exam is it. When that is eliminated, and it will be, there will be an influx of hams who make the current crop of 2m CBers look good.

Keep in mind that when ARRL (no, I know they didn't do it alone) espoused no-code back in the mid-80s, they promised us a more comprehensive theory exam would go along with no-code. Well, after selling us that bill of goods, you'll notice it didn't happen. The no-code opened the flood gates. Are all no-coders bad? Of course not, but there are more undesireables on our bands today than would be had the comprehensive exam actually happened. When no-code hits HF, I personally feel ham radio in the US will be an international embarrassment

Then again, that might just be the plan. Let our own actions force them to push us aside. I can see that too. As others have said, plenty of paying customers want our bands.

Just my 2 cents worth.

International Morse code is a tradition and one of the basic steping stones for amateur radio entry. That was a requirement made by our Federal Government.

Got to slip this in before this old geezer forgets, I'll put my head on a chop for this one, I actually think about this; how many newer generation amateurs know that you never send faster in CW then the slowest operator can receive? The old geezers and codgers know this. End of that.

The newer generation amateurs just want to use voice, well there is an examination for that purpose, Technician.
Let those that would like that level stay there, no Morse required, limited, yes. They selected what they wanted.

HF now, listening to just voice communcations and operating only voice on HF is putting individuals on a limited mode. They want to listen on voice and can't hear nothing, they limited themselves, no knowledge of Morse code.

Wundering off the subject just abit. The new or newer digital modes, just a computer download, a freebie. Keystrokes and you have the modes. No effort put forth except moving the fingers. Questions have been asked, why don't they test on the new digital modes. The answer is a simple one, it's not required by our Government.

There are many excuse stated, why the Morse code?
I'll just list afew most amateurs have seen and read:
It's outdated, it's old, it's not used by this or the that,
it's slow, it's too hard, I can't do it, on and on.

Being not used by other Agencies is not a valid excuse for amateur radio. The other Agencies are not amateur radio, period.

College requires a list of academics required for graduation. Meet the requirement or no diploma.

Amateur radio has requirements, such as they are, the US Government set those requirements, fulfill them or no license, not the gimme because.

Some, not all, however to me it's a majority of individuals that give the excuse and the &quot;I can't and give me&quot;. My personal observation and opinion of these types, lazy.
Morse is not a multiple guessing game.
Morse is a learning process to gain knowledge, I don't see or read that. What I do see and read is, excuses and I can't do it plus I want it to go away.

Morse isn't a filter in amateur radio, those with all the excuses are filtering themselves, I don't want to.

Morse code will not go away, it will remain intacted by those that desire to communicate on amatuer radio.

Morse is required in this Country, the Government sets the rules.

Last, it has been said, Morse code seperates the true amateur radio operator from the unlicensed, I believe we know those.

[n7wsb]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WA2ZDY @ Aug. 16 2003,10:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Keep in mind that when ARRL (no, I know they didn't do it alone) espoused no-code back in the mid-80s, they promised us a more comprehensive theory exam would go along with no-code. #Well, after selling us that bill of goods, you'll notice it didn't happen. #The no-code opened the flood gates. #Are all no-coders bad? #Of course not, but there are more undesireables on our bands today than would be had the comprehensive exam actually happened. #When no-code hits HF, I personally feel ham radio in the US will be an international embarrassment[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Have you tuned across 20 or 80 meters late at night? As far as 11 meters were already there, and many of the embaressments we have there are people who took the time to learn morse code - and they have reguard for power either - I'm sure their local conversations (the things they talk about it sounds like they live just a few miles apart) are probably being heard world wide. You know I'm going to start recording that mess and post samples on the web. The cb'ers who cheated their way onto hf are already here and code didn't stop them.

There is no evidence that the &quot;flood gates&quot; will open up. We are arrogant in thinking that everyone and their sister wants on HF. I could probably stand on a street corner with a FCC license generator and hand extra class licenses out and I bet most people would toss them away. Many more people actually just enjoy local communications. My mother (kd7slv) for instance just likes talking to the rest of the family (who is also licensed) she has no interest in dxing, breaking through the noise level with code etc.

Most no-coders I've met here and elsewhere are actually some of the nicest and most progressive ham's I've ever met. Some of the most fun projects ever embarked upon in this state were from no-coders. The balloon amateur radio experiment I helped work on in the early 90's is a good example - most of the status quo hams had (and wanted) nothing to do with the project (there were still bunches of generals and advanced that helped out of course) but the guys who pushed it into light were all no-coders and it was great fun and we got a lot of great pictures. Plus because it was before gps was anywhere near affordable (and before arps existed) it was state wide dfing expedition the likes of which we'll probably never see again.

The hobby's just teetering on the edge of obscelence and irrelevance. The fact that BPL has even been taken seriously by the FCC is proof of this. If the bands were far more used by hams they wouldn't even consider the interference.

If code is a literacy campaign like many suggest here how come we don't train people how to use it in the clubs (I'm basing this off the local clubs and the one my father belongs to - none of which train people how to use code)? And if we do how come there needs to be a federally mandated test to prove efficency?

And the arguement on university requirements is funny at best - the university I graduated from there are well over 60 different schools and if you can't meet the requirements for one (and no - not everyone is going to have the math skills to become an electrical engineer or a computer software engineer) you just look for one similar and work towards a degree in another.

[kb0qwd]

Hi i'm new to this fourm.I've been reading alot of the letters here and other forums.On getting rid of morse-code.

I have a tech-no code license,that i've had since 94.I have practice morse code on and off.I get tired off it and quit.Maybe because i will never use morse code.

I also notice how you compare all the bad things to 11 meter operators.I still talk 11 meters and i always #will,so i guess this make me one of the losers.I listen to other bands and i here fight's going on by the good ham operaters.I for get that it's alright because they(the good ham opreators) have ham ticket's and dont talk on 11meters.

I've been to ham and 11meter get togethers.I'ts funny that i see the same type of people at both type's of #events.

After reading some the comments from good ham operators it makes me wonder if i should just let my license go,even if the FCC get's rid of the code.

Well just my thoughts take care and God bless.

kb0qwd(11 meter operator)
#http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[WA2ZDY]

N7WSB:

I've heard 20 and 75 and you're right. #I never said it couldn't be better; of course ham radio could be better. #I simply feel the complete elimination of a code proficiency requirement will make it that much worse. #I said it clearly - it's MY opinion. #

And I also said, very clearly, not all no-code hams are bad. #Many are excellent. #I know a few since I work 2m and 440 primarily. #But again, things have changed in ham radio over the years. #The changes were more abrupt, and most folks would not say for the better, at certain points on the timeline. #Since MY entry into ham radio, those times are the CB boom, and the no-code tech ticket. #And I'm sorry that offends no-code techs, but folks, if you know you're not part of the problem, then this doesn't apply to you. #Or as it was said once, if the shoe fits, wear it. #

As for university requirements, that's actually a pretty good analogy. #Forget the requirements to graduate; how about the ones to get in? #Like two years of high school foreign language? #Yep. #Now tell me how many of you college graduates speak fluently the language you &quot;had&quot; to have for college? #Come on now . . . # I know some of you do, but all? #For every one of you who doesn't speak that high school language, fluently or otherwise, that was a waste, wasn't it? #But it was required &quot;because someone said so.&quot; #I wonder if you bitched about that as much as some prospective HF licensees cry about the code. #Hmmmmmmmmm . . .

KB0QWD:

Never said everyone on CB is bad. #I have used a CB radio myself. #It had its place and it filled the need appropriately. #However, I got my ham license in January 1975. #That was before the big CB boom of the late 70s and early 80s, a time when shows about truck drivers and CB radios were rampant. #There was a song about it too by CW McCall (what a bizarre irony THAT name, huh?!) #I saw what happened to ham radio as the CB boomers started graduating to the ham bands. #Were they all bad? #No, absolutely not, probably not even the majority. #But enough were and still are, that the bad taste is there. #Again, I have used CB radio myself. #I had my ham license first, but I've been on CB. #It has a purpose, and I used it for such.

If you feel you should turn in your ticketor let it lapse or whatever, you do what you have to do.

[G1ZFS]

Gentlemen

Thank you for all the replys

I think I'm getting a small insight as to why some people want to keep the test, and apart from the last post nobody seems to be getting tetchy.

I'm afraid cb is looked down upon by most hams, me included, and largely they only have themselves to blame.

But I, like many hams did start out on cb, as a teenager it was the only way I ever managed to get a girl I had never met before sitting in the passenger seat of my car in her nightclothes !!!

Once I had pased that stage, and actually wanted to talk to people, rather than date anything in a skirt, it was ham radio for me.

I must also comment, as a &quot;no code chappy&quot; as you lot say, that I've always found (from listening to hf) that the operating procedure is dismal compared to the vhf I recieve over here. I have always thought the reason for this was down to the fact that on vhf, your going to be within driving distance (generally) of the person your talking too, so a thick ear for misbehaving isnt out of the question, hf of course...the distance can be very large indeed.

K7PIG and others who have expressed a worry about the future of morse code....I dont think you have anything to worry about at all, I actually think, although it is only my humble opinion, you could well find the reverse is true.

As people begin to use hf, with low sunspot activity, they are soon going to learn that all the stuff about punching a signal through the noise, using morse code, to get that dx contact isnt just rubbish being spouted by old timers, but is in fact very very true.

Over here we have morse code segments on vhf, as well as hf, I dont know if the same is true in the usa, I have never heard any other mode being used in these segments in the uk.

We have undergone many changes over the last few years in the uk, I opposed all of them, just look what I'd written by my callsign on my qrz profile !

There were all the predictions that have been expressed on here, and apart from a very few cases, none of it has come true.

I used to teach the course ae4fa refers too, with the practical bit, and we had a few ex cbers who caused problems, but they were soon dealt with.

I still find ae4fa's comments about this course amusing, that exam doesnt actually lead to any cept recognition at all, they are issued with &quot;2&quot; callsigns, 2E1 ABC etc etc, and cant operate anywhere but the uk.

Generally, apart from the problems with full rae no code cept 2 licences versus the new entry level foundation course licence, the cept 2 didnt have hf access, the entry level did, (this has now been rectified), there have been very few problems, and what problems there were , I'm afraid to have to admit, were largely caused by old full cept 2's like me annoying the new people, telling them to get off our bands as without a cept class they were just cbers.

Only time will tell if all these changes will work for the good of ham radio, but without them its a dead hobby, so I cant blame the authorities for trying to get new interest out to the younger people, and perhaps the older ones who found our rae forbidding. ( it wasnt easy to get, if you werent an engineer already, it took about a year at nightschool, expensive, time consuming, and prohibitive to people on shift work etc etc), and over here, it was the ONLY way you could become a ham.

I actually know a chap M1DQR, who passed the exam on his 12th attempt, I wouldnt have tried that hard.

Good luck with the changes in the states, despite everyone saying that your government is slow, I would be suprised if you still have morse code being the only filter to hf at christmas.

I still havent bothered with hf, ham radio to me is chatting to like minded souls whilst travelling between jobs, using vhf repeaters, but thats the good thing about ham radio, its what you want it to be.

Best Wishes

Nigel G1ZFS

The US Morse code requirement and the WRC-2003 changes. Nothing will be done until the Fall of 2004 when our FCC and NTIA discuss the matters of WRC-2003 decisions. Then the FCC will announce and effective date for their decisions.

I believe most of the old timers as myself will agree that; back in the 1940's thru a portion of the 1970's there were little to zero complaints, regarding the FCC's requirements to be a licensed amateur. Somewhere in the 1970's and beyond ( my years could be wrong ), however, a strong voice of many started the complaining about the code requirement, I'll stop at this point, for we have heard them all.

So, the scenairo is this; we don't want it, why and it should not be required. WRC-2003 stated, Morse will be dropped for HF operation. Each Country sets their rules, not WRC-2003.

Someone out there, PLEASE explain to us what on Earth is the REAL problem with learning a requirement.
Is it in fact, laziness?
Is it in fact, I just don't want too?
Is it in fact, not a viable and usable means to communicate in the amateur radio service? It is usable.
Is it fact, what are the facts?
Please tell us the facts, not the excuses, please?

As you have gathered by now, I'm for Morse code and the requirement. When this subject comes up over and over again I will be repetitive.

It's a requirement in the United States so issued by the FCC. There is no excuse, learn and earn, period.

[AE6IP]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (k7pig @ Aug. 16 2003,16:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Someone out there, PLEASE explain to us what on Earth is the REAL problem with learning a requirement.
Is it in fact, laziness?
Is it in fact, I just don't want too?
Is it in fact, not a viable and usable means to communicate in the amateur radio service? It is usable.
Is it fact, what are the facts?
Please tell us the facts, not the excuses, please?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
that question fits the 'have you stopped beating your wife yet?' model, so I'm going to answer a more reasonable form:

Why should morse code be replaced as a requirement by harder technical and procedural tests?

Because the real problem that everyone who wants to keep code keeps complaining about is technical and procedural incompetence.

You test for what you want to measure, not what best fits your tradition. Asking for code-testing as a gate when the problem is poor technical or procedural understanding is like making English tests tougher as a way of improving math literacy.

I'll give a brief answer to the question. In days of old, when there was considerable use of code in military and commercial applications, it was quite possible that you might get a distress call on CW, or be drafted for a war, and thus, having a pre-trained pool of CW operators was a benefit.

As time went along, the use of code by the military and commercial services declined and then disappeared. So, I hate to say this, but there really no longer is a good reason to require it. If people enjoy it, as I do, then let them learn and use it. Otherwise, it can join many other skills, like hunting, which was once common but is now only done by a few interested people.

I think the worry here is that without some sort of hurdles to jump, ham radio will become too easy to get into, and degrade into another citizens band (thus the demand for harder theory tests). That is a valid concern, of course.

Perhaps we should require all hams to homebrew their own rigs, then have the rig tested for an acceptable level of performance before being allowed on the air. That sounds fine to me, but I doubt that many others will like the idea...

Jean

[G1ZFS]

AE6IP

I feel your comments are very relevant, but at the same time I do feel for K7PIG.

The morse code is a tradition, and i'm sure....one day....someone in authority, both in military and civilian life is going to be sorry that it has been removed from commercial use.

I think good people like K7PIG will keep it alive, and I cant explain why....I've never bothered much before....but now I dont need too, and I dont feel forced, I'm going to do it.

But, I still dont think it is a good &quot;filter&quot; for hf ham radio, it was required until 1999, no arguments there, but after that it just isnt required for access to ham radio.

I favour the technical method, but I would of course, I'm an engineer, so not much effort needed from me.

You are absolutely correct K7PIG

couldnt be bothered
did have other things to do, (I joined the hobby young)
but worst of all, and I can say this honestly, I had it rammed down my throat by so called cept 1 hams , whose radios I fixed because they werent capable, so I just thought &quot;nuts&quot; and stayed on vhf.

Best Wishes

Nigel G1ZFS

[G1ZFS]

AE6IP

I feel your comments are very relevant, but at the same time I do feel for K7PIG.

The morse code is a tradition, and i'm sure....one day....someone in authority, both in military and civilian life is going to be sorry that it has been removed from commercial use.

I think good people like K7PIG will keep it alive, and I cant explain why....I've never bothered much before....but now I dont need too, and I dont feel forced, I'm going to do it.

But, I still dont think it is a good &quot;filter&quot; for hf ham radio, it was required until 1999, no arguments there, but after that it just isnt required for access to ham radio.

I favour the technical method, but I would of course, I'm an engineer, so not much effort needed from me.

You are absolutely correct K7PIG

couldnt be bothered
did have other things to do, (I joined the hobby young)
but worst of all, and I can say this honestly, I had it rammed down my throat by so called cept 1 hams , whose radios I fixed because they werent capable, so I just thought &quot;nuts&quot; and stayed on vhf.

Best Wishes

Nigel G1ZFS

[G1ZFS]

AE6IP

I feel your comments are very relevant, but at the same time I do feel for K7PIG.

The morse code is a tradition, and i'm sure....one day....someone in authority, both in military and civilian life is going to be sorry that it has been removed from commercial use.

I think good people like K7PIG will keep it alive, and I cant explain why....I've never bothered much before....but now I dont need too, and I dont feel forced, I'm going to do it.

But, I still dont think it is a good &quot;filter&quot; for hf ham radio, it was required until 1999, no arguments there, but after that it just isnt required for access to ham radio.

I favour the technical method, but I would of course, I'm an engineer, so not much effort needed from me.

You are absolutely correct K7PIG

couldnt be bothered
did have other things to do, (I joined the hobby young)
but worst of all, and I can say this honestly, I had it rammed down my throat by so called cept 1 hams , whose radios I fixed because they werent capable, so I just thought &quot;nuts&quot; and stayed on vhf.

Best Wishes

Nigel G1ZFS

[G1ZFS]

AE6IP

I feel your comments are very relevant, but at the same time I do feel for K7PIG.

The morse code is a tradition, and i'm sure....one day....someone in authority, both in military and civilian life is going to be sorry that it has been removed from commercial use.

I think good people like K7PIG will keep it alive, and I cant explain why....I've never bothered much before....but now I dont need too, and I dont feel forced, I'm going to do it.

But, I still dont think it is a good &quot;filter&quot; for hf ham radio, it was required until 1999, no arguments there, but after that it just isnt required for access to ham radio.

I favour the technical method, but I would of course, I'm an engineer, so not much effort needed from me.

You are absolutely correct K7PIG

couldnt be bothered
did have other things to do, (I joined the hobby young)
but worst of all, and I can say this honestly, I had it rammed down my throat by so called cept 1 hams , whose radios I fixed because they werent capable, so I just thought &quot;nuts&quot; and stayed on vhf.

Best Wishes

Nigel G1ZFS

[G1ZFS]

AE6IP

I feel your comments are very relevant, but at the same time I do feel for K7PIG.

The morse code is a tradition, and i'm sure....one day....someone in authority, both in military and civilian life is going to be sorry that it has been removed from commercial use.

I think good people like K7PIG will keep it alive, and I cant explain why....I've never bothered much before....but now I dont need too, and I dont feel forced, I'm going to do it.

But, I still dont think it is a good &quot;filter&quot; for hf ham radio, it was required until 1999, no arguments there, but after that it just isnt required for access to ham radio.

I favour the technical method, but I would of course, I'm an engineer, so not much effort needed from me.

You are absolutely correct K7PIG

couldnt be bothered
did have other things to do, (I joined the hobby young)
but worst of all, and I can say this honestly, I had it rammed down my throat by so called cept 1 hams , whose radios I fixed because they werent capable, so I just thought &quot;nuts&quot; and stayed on vhf.

Best Wishes

Nigel G1ZFS

[G1ZFS]

oooer I dont know how that happened, but I think I've broken qrz !!!!

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

Server problem, I expect...

Not your fault, Nigel.

Nigel.
Ramming it down someones throat is not proper nor polite of any amateur radio operate.

I was fortunate with Morse. First, I was a Clarinet player and a Singer, I had the rhythm for sending and did attain 22 wpm sending and receiving on a straight key, which I still use today from the early 1960's.

Receiving code in my head, no, I write it down on paper lagging about 5 to 8 characters after the sending station has stopped.

I had to overcome 16 wpm, took me about 4 days to acheive that, then on to 18 and 22 in 2 days if my recall is correct.

Morse is not difficult in any respect, it takes time, as with a different language.
As simple as I can put it, it is a learning process.

Oh, the Joint US Military still is training on the Morse, right here at Fort Huachuca, Arizona. It happens to be the sole installation in the US Military that trains Morse operators.

[k5rna]

A little CB history for the ones who wern't around back then or don't remember.Back in the early 70s when the phoney gas shortage was created to raise prices i put a CB in my car.2mtr repeaters were far and few between and no cell phones.I lived in Wyo and S.D.for many years and in my work was on the road 90% of the time.When the speed limits were lowered to 55 mph it took forever it seems to cross those densely populated western states.Every police dept and thier dog invested in radar guns.They even sat at the bottom of long grades making a fortune off truckers and others who coulden't hold thier speed to 55 mph.They would collect fines from the truckers who were only 3 or 4 miles over the limit.So truckers started useing CB''s to warn each other about the speed traps.Thats how it all got started.I was in Ore.when i had a rough time finding a gas station open.I was parked and a trucker stoped and i told him my problem.He told me where to find gasolne.That is where i put my first cb in the car.All the way back to Wyo,and going out of my way with the cb, truckers kept me posted as to where i could find gas.I made it home with thier help.Oh yes.I was not a trucker.I was a traveling musician.A Little trivia here.73 all

[gdouds]

Hi, Nigel.

Here's my 2 cents and an analogy.

Morse code is a tradition, but it's also critical to amateur radio.

Consider that our FCC regulations provide that amateur radio is not just a hobby, but a &quot;service&quot;.

Also consider that each license is a &quot;control operator&quot; license for a station.

In other words, the licensed operator is the boss of a station that is not commercial, and not just a hobby, but a public service.

Now, there are several digital modes of which CW is one. #But CW is the only one you can do in a jam by simply touching two wires together. #It's simple, and very efficient. #When all else fails, CW works.

Now consider the case of a store suffering from a power outage. #These days, the store simply has to shut down. #The clerks don't know how to make a pen-and-paper receipt, or they aren't permitted to do that. #They must wait until the &quot;computer comes back up&quot;. #In other words, when the power goes out, the store is closed.

Amateur Radio is not a commercial operation and it cannot tolerate that attitude.

When conditions are unfavorable, CW is about the only method available for sending messages. #It's like the pen-and-paper receipt. #We're telling operators that they can't be like the minimum-wage store clerks who either can't be trusted or don't know how to write paper receipts. #The amateur operators are needed desperately and must be able to use basic, efficient communications methods to get the job done.

The minimal CW requirement for the General Operator license is a recognition that CW is the most basic and efficient means of communication in times of need, and anyone having more than a basic license ought to be able to use that method. #And remember, it does not test proficiency. #It simply tests &quot;adequacy&quot; at the lowest reasonable speed.

73,
KB3GDD

[K5CEY]

In my day, Morse code was not only a tradition, but a right of passage.
# If you decided that you wanted to be a Ham, that's the first thing you tackled.
# The theory study came later, all the while, keeping up with code practice.
# #I was 9 years old when I decided to learn the code. I made a set of visual &quot;flash cards&quot; and every night before I hit the sack, I would concentrate on those cards and eventually learned all the characters.
# #We all know that a visual study guide is not really the best approach, but it worked for me.
# #By the time I learned the characters and numbers, my effective speed was probably about 2 or 3 WPM.
# #By attending the local radio club code class, I quickly built up my speed to 7 WPM. Certainly enough to pass the 5 WPM Novice exam.
# #That was 48 years ago, and I still have a great feeling of accomplishment from those early days.
# #When I got my general ticket in '56, I worked 'phone #almost exclusively, but several times a year, I always enjoyed firing up on the low end of 40 and enjoying a simple but very enjoyable CW QSO.
# #From my peak of 25/30 WPM back then, I've probably dropped to 18/20, but I'm sure glad it's like riding a bicycle. Once you learn, you'll never forget.
# # # # # # # # # # John # K5CEY

[AE6IP]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (gdouds @ Aug. 16 2003,20:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Consider that our FCC regulations provide that amateur radio is not just a hobby, but a &quot;service&quot;.

Also consider that each license is a &quot;control operator&quot; license for a station.

In other words, the licensed operator is the boss of a station that is not commercial, and not just a hobby, but a public service.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Um, no.

The word service doesn't mean to the FCC what you think it does. It's just their noun for the collection of users that are using some part(s) of the spectrum.

For instance, consider FRS (Family Radio Service) an CBS (Citizen Band Service.)

[AE6IP]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (gdouds @ Aug. 16 2003,20:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">When conditions are unfavorable, CW is about the only method available for sending messages. #It's like the pen-and-paper receipt. #We're telling operators that they can't be like the minimum-wage store clerks who either can't be trusted or don't know how to write paper receipts. #The amateur operators are needed desperately and must be able to use basic, efficient communications methods to get the job done.

The minimal CW requirement for the General Operator license is a recognition that CW is the most basic and efficient means of communication in times of need, and anyone having more than a basic license ought to be able to use that method. #And remember, it does not test proficiency. #It simply tests &quot;adequacy&quot; at the lowest reasonable speed.

73,
KB3GDD[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Even the ARRL ARECC courses point out situations in which CW is neither the most efficient, or, more importantly, most accurate, medium. Good packet radio beats CW on both counts, and PSK, in reality, is a strong competitor to packet for efficiency and to CW for propagation.

And spread spectrum techniques (not used in the amateur service) coupled with digital signals beat all the above.

In fact, the only circumstance in which CW is a more effective means of communication is those rare circumstances in which all commercial communication in and out of an area are down, it is necessary to make emergency communications over a long distance, and you get lucky on propagation.

How often has that come up? Hasn't happened in the US in my entire life, and I've had the luck of being impacted by the Hebgen (Quake) Lake earthquake, Mt. St. Helens, Loma Prieta earthquake, the last Seattle earthquake, some of the worst snow storms to ever hit the Pacific Northwest, and two major forest fires.

[n7wsb]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WA2ZDY @ Aug. 16 2003,14:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As for university requirements, that's actually a pretty good analogy. #Forget the requirements to graduate; how about the ones to get in? #Like two years of high school foreign language? #Yep. #Now tell me how many of you college graduates speak fluently the language you &quot;had&quot; to have for college? #Come on now . . . # I know some of you do, but all? #For every one of you who doesn't speak that high school language, fluently or otherwise, that was a waste, wasn't it? #But it was required &quot;because someone said so.&quot; #I wonder if you bitched about that as much as some prospective HF licensees cry about the code. #Hmmmmmmmmm . . .[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Ironically I love code - just a few weeks ago I was thinking about it. The biggest reason I advocated it was because I had to do it - not because I could think of any good reason to impose it on someone else. Sure its useful in emergencies and can often cut through the noise floor, but I'd be willing to bet a lot of the amateur population couldn't use code to save their life if it depended on it. The I had to do it, and so you do too mantra (and I'm sure if we all look deep inside we all feel this) is to much like an intiation ritual more than anything else.

Not to nitpick or change the topic, but in Oregon only liberal arts majors *have* to learn another language. Like history students for instance (and on point one could argue that most history students will never need to use another language - none of my professors ever did). Science and Engineering majors actually don't have to learn another language. Also there are more than one way to get into a university. At PSU (where I graduated) you can have a high gpa from high school to get in (or some other mentionable honor), or if your like me you can waive all entrance exams if you get an associates degree in a community college (this is true for most universities around the world) because it shows dilligence and dedication to academics. I showed my brother in law the Extra class study guide and he thought all the equations and schematics in there &quot;were cake&quot; (his words actually). He has also designed .18 micron rf devices for various Intel chips - should he get an Extra class license automatically - or be able to waive the cw requirement? Because thats how the university system works http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif.

To me though amateur radio exams are just marginally better than certification tests. Technician class - like MSCE there is really only one gateway in - and that is to study and take the exam. I still think the vast majority of training should happen before or after getting a license because there is no exam that is going to prepare you for admining a large network or operating a radio professionally.

[n7wsb]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AE6IP @ Aug. 16 2003,23:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In fact, the only circumstance in which CW is a more effective means of communication is those rare circumstances in which all commercial communication in and out of an area are down, it is necessary to make emergency communications over a long distance, and you get lucky on propagation.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
One thing your missing is that CW is the most fundamental mode - if your handy with electronics for instance it doesn't take much to build your own cw transmitter (I'm good with electronics, but I could never design anything). It takes far more than that to build something to do a digital mode like PSK-31 - for one thing you need a computer or a programmable DSP.

That still doesn't make the code requirement right though - as far as emergencies go maybe we should be able to require hams to be able to swim a mile, have red cross certification, have suvivalist training or be able to write in shorthand - all of which have uses in a real emergency.

[AE6IP]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n7wsb @ Aug. 17 2003,01:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AE6IP @ Aug. 16 2003,23:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In fact, the only circumstance in which CW is a more effective means of communication is those rare circumstances in which all commercial communication in and out of an area are down, it is necessary to make emergency communications over a long distance, and you get lucky on propagation.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
One thing your missing is that CW is the most fundamental mode.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
CW is the most fundamental mode. Morse code is not the most fundamental use of it. Any one who does search and rescue will tell you that
make a noise, any noise, is the most fundamental way of communicating in an emergency. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[n7wsb]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AE6IP @ Aug. 19 2003,20:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">CW is the most fundamental mode. Morse code is not the most fundamental use of it. Any one who does search and rescue will tell you that
make a noise, any noise, is the most fundamental way of communicating in an emergency. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Maybe not. Like I said in another post most hams I have met in my life could not operate cw to save their lives - or for that matter are not prepared to communicate during an emergency. Its kind of like keeping assault rifles around the house for protection - most of us are no good at personal counter-terrorism.

Brings me to an interesting point. Seems like most people who are general or above on all the boards are DIE HARD cw, but you go to the local club meetings and you don't get this kind of religous fundamentalism. Like these guys http://www.parg.org/ - last meeting I went to I only found like two guys there who knew morse code, but many of them were general and extra (my question was simple whats cw for / ?) - and a lot of those guys have been extra since it was 22 wpm exam, but didn't know code since they never use it.

[K3STX]

I think WSB is right, many of the pro-code posters ARE general class and above.(Not all, of course). I think you might even find that generals/above licensed BEFORE 1990 are even more pro-code. Doesn't this tell you something?
It is a bit of a religious thing, cuz' it is one of the last remaining bastions of the hobby/service. In addition, there is really no reason to remove the requirement and I think it IS a filter for riff/raff. It is not hard to learn (easier than basic electronic theory, in my opinion) and it has tied us all together for 80 of the past 90 years or so.

paul

[M1AEC]

Hello all,
I would like to add that most things can now be done on the internet with no challenge (in reality) to the technical mind.
I am not a CW operator M1 (UK Call) &amp; never took the HF side of things because i felt CW although respected &amp; no issue to me was not the reason i wished to use HF.
I think exams over CW would be enough of a test of attitude &amp; compidence. In my younger days the point of being told i HAD to do CW to go on HF gave me more of a younger mind not to take it although i had to pass exams in the first place. I now do not use HAM communications at all &amp; do everything via the net. This is a sad story of affairs but is the way the younger generation (younger than me now) think &amp; to them CW seems antique. I mean no dis-respect to any CW user &amp; i admire them for the patience in learning this skill but HAM is not exactly taking the younger folk by storm &amp; in order to keep the HF bands you need users. No users or not enough then in the UK the RA will re-allocate the air spectrum to other commercial operators who would like the bands. So certification is probably the only way of keeping HAM alive with out boring some one who has no interest in CW but is inspired by Electronic Data &amp; Voice communications through the air &amp; the fascination of how it gets there in the first place.

[kd5icr]

5wpm!!!!!!!
What is so hard about that? Come on we talk faster than that.
And I bet everybody here types faster than that. As for Nigel I would guess that it is a tradition thing, Like a pine tree in your house for christmas or fire crackers on the 4th of july.
I would like to keep code myself, I am working on it now,but with work and other things I cant get to it as much as I would like to,but a local club is going to have some classes on it so I will wait untill the middle of september to go in and get it out of the way.
I will say this, if it is dropped by our FCC than so be it, I hope the older op's dont get a rotten attitude and take it out on those people that did not have to pass it.
As for Ham v CB come now I talked CB for a long time before I got my ticket and I have never been told I suck because I used CB, in fact it was a ham that also used CB that got a bunch of us into ham radio. We all went and took the test at around the same time and a few of us have call signs in order.
(kinda cool). I will work code untill I pass and when I do I will not rip on those that did not have too. I hope the rest will do likewise.

If the Internet would just go away, most of the young people wouldn't know what to do, at all.
Exams. on CW, guess at it.
Well, if I know you or anyone else is not Morse qualified, I terminate the conversation.
Quanity seems to be the answer, not quality.
I listen to amateurs operating exactly on the band edges, quanity and not quality.
Their not applying themselves at all, memorize, take a guess and the &quot;hope theory.&quot; A terrible shame on society today.
The Internet, nothing is required.

[K3STX]

To quote M1AEC &quot;to them (the younger generation) the idea of CW seems antique.&quot; We may have hit upon something here. Somehow, the idea of antique is viewed as a negative, not a positive. I view antiques with respect. I am only 40 years old but my favorite radio is a 1921 Crosley regenerative set. I (like many, many of us) think that a National HRO blows away a modern radio. I don't care if the new Icom does a better job at digging out the weak DX, that has never, NEVER been the point. It is what you can do with the equipment you have. That is why QRP is so popular and why I love my &quot;cloud warmer&quot; 40 meter dipole. If I had a 3 element yagi 50 meters high it would be easier to work them, but would it be any more fun?

To many, MANY of us, antique and old-fashioned are GOOD things, not bad. I think the no-code folks are unfortunately missing out on the best part of the hobby. How many of us have said to a relative stranger &quot;I am a Ham radio operator&quot;. They then ask, &quot;Wow, so you are one of those guys who does Morse code?&quot; and you have to reply &quot;Well, no I don't know Morse code, but Ham radio has CHANGED.&quot; I guess their reply would be somethig like &quot;Yeah, whatever.&quot; To those who don't know better, what sets us apart from the other wierdo's in the world is Morse code; what a shame to lose it.

paul

[k0ews]

Nigel, I'm a musician, and one of my favorite composer/arrangers was Duke Ellington. #He once said, &quot;there are only two kinds of music, good music and bad music.&quot; #I feel the same applies to just about everything, including amateur radio operators. #If there were a test that could separate good ops from the bad ones, we would have put it in long ago. #CW is the only test remaining that requires proficiency in a skill that we take. #We have published question pools, and anyone can practice the exam to the point of passing; a far cry from the old days my Uncle tells me about taking his exams in 1940. #Being a music teacher, I'll be the first to tell you that not everyone posesses the auditory skills to pick up CW. #There are people that simply cannot do it. #Does the morse testing separate the good ops from the bad ones? #Not on your life. #There are some highly qualified VHF/UHF guys who frankly, should be on HF, #now that the rules have changed. #I'm ambiguous on this issue. #I see both sides, and feel that part 97 of the FCC rules requires an overhaul. #I think Morse is the best mode on the radio, and it's all I run. #I passed at 5wpm, but being a music man, I now comfortably run at 25-30 wpm after only 3 years. #A lot of the pro-coders feeling is that we want to preserve the mode and the spectrum for future generations. #Hams that have never had the experience of CW have missed a lot. #It's my favorite mode for a reason; I've had nothing but great QSOs, #there's always someone on, #and it will get through the worst band conditions. #That being said, I'm also of the opinion that good operators shouldn't be excluded from HF because of the mode only. #I think we should look at offering HF privileges to no-coders, and perhaps make the &quot;Technician&quot; class of license what it should be; offer a very advanced technical exam for HF that one could take as an alternative to the CW exam, and make it very, very hard; no published question pools, and a lot of the electrical theory,etc., importing some of the questions from the Extra class exams. #This way, everyone wins; we get some darned good ops from the VHF/UHF world on HF, and keep morse testing for those that would like to go that way. #Like I said, with changing times, I feel that part 97 needs to be re-worked a bit. #However, I also feel very strongly that Morse should continue as a mode now and for years to come; after all, it's the 2nd most popular mode in ham radio for a reason. #We need to get past the bickering amongst ourselves, and move ahead for the sake of the hobby we all enjoy. #Personally, I don't have a problem with 5 wpm, and I don't feel it excludes THAT many people that simply cannot do Morse, but I also feel that there are some who may never get it, and for them, an alternate route to HF may just be in order. #Thanks for your post, and my best to you.

[kc7jty]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb0qwd @ Aug. 16 2003,12:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hi i'm new to this fourm.I've been reading alot of the letters here and other forums.On getting rid of morse-code.

I have a tech-no code license,that i've had since 94.I have practice morse code on and off.I get tired off it and quit.Maybe because i will never use morse code.

I also notice how you compare all the bad things to 11 meter operators.I still talk 11 meters and i always #will,so i guess this make me one of the losers.I listen to other bands and i here fight's going on by the good ham operaters.I for get that it's alright because they(the good ham opreators) have ham ticket's and dont talk on 11meters.

I've been to ham and 11meter get togethers.I'ts funny that i see the same type of people at both type's of #events.

After reading some the comments from good ham operators it makes me wonder if i should just let my license go,even if the FCC get's rid of the code.

Well just my thoughts take care and God bless.

kb0qwd(11 meter operator)
#http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Amen brother!
KC7JTY

[kc7jty]

There are quite a few of the pro coders who would rather see the complete demise of amateur radio than loose the code requirement. Yes, it is a religious thing indeed. Just like someone who will attend his church regularly even though he may not necessarily care for the majority of its members. The study of human behavior is indeed the most complex and facinating subject. Who you are as a person doesn't matter. What matters is weather or not you are the same religion as I am.
KC7JTY