RAC recommends Morse dropped, new exams. [Archive]

10-31-2003, 03:10 AM

I recently upgraded to general, yes thank you. Anyway enough of that. Is this all we're going to hear from now on? Really people, can't we find something better to argue about! CW is a mode of communication no more no less. Weather we use it or not is entirely up to each person, I know some old timers who have been hams longer than I have been alive (46yrs.) and a lot of them are saying get rid of it once and for all. I know some others who say keep it. It never ends, it makes for some really interesting radio club meetings let me tell you.
All I'm trying to say is if you personally are going to use it, use it and don't try and push it down every one else's throat. As for me I said once I get through this code test thats it no more code for me, now I'm rethinking my decision, but if I do decide to use code its MY DECISION no one else's. Lets leave it at that.
73's
ki4cra Mark

K6UEY

10-31-2003, 03:33 AM

F. Y. I.
73 = BEST REGARDS
73's=BEST REGARDS'ES
We used to call them NOVICE, because they lacked skill and experience !!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

10-31-2003, 04:08 AM

It doesn't matter.. keep the code, or get rid of it. We will still have this thing we call a HOBBY.. get it.. A HOBBY!
We are not pros... We are HOBBIESTS. I will still listen for the weak signals out there, and my computer will decifer(sp?) them. I've tried to pass the code test at least 4 times. I would love to be able to use the code, but something keeps me from understanding the gibberish. It could be that I'm deaf to the tones, or it could just be a mental thing.
What ever.. it's still just a hobby so I'm not going to get bent out of shape about it.. No.. I think I'll just go out to the garage and work on my hot rod instead, and let all you old farts pop a vein over it http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

10-31-2003, 04:10 AM

Oh yea... 73, and 88

Richard W7MAX

KD7WHQ

10-31-2003, 04:47 AM

Hobbiests, true enough, but...
RACES and all it's downline hardly fit that description.
Backup, and fill-in emergency communications, and comm from community centers, hospitals, and even some security in places. We can be places the public service agencies can't, as they would be spread too thin, and pass messages they can't, as they are either interservice, or personal.
Find an ACS/ARES/RACES group in your area, and check it out on the air when they have a drill. A dual band rig is real handy. HF in addition is a plus, as they are on HF, 2m and 70cm out here. 2m local coordination plus some simplex EOC-EOC communications, 70cm, Medical, and other EOC-EOC comm. HF for out of area comm.

It's a hobby, until it comes down to the wire, and then the mode shifts.
It isn't a hobby anymore, it's a service.

BTW, ACS etc have scheduled nets. Visitor checkins are more than welcome..

Almost forgot to return this to the thread http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Morse operators would be needed in adverse operating conditions which many disasters might create.
VHF/UHF is great for local comm, but HF is what gets out, and a number of scenarios make HF completely useless for voice.

Just the facts as I see 'em.. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

N4WA

10-31-2003, 04:49 AM

Sorry to see the RAC go down that path. Creating ANY operator class without Morse code ability in the amateur service was the most boneheaded decision that the FCC has made since creating a citizen's radio service in a frequency spectrum that can be affected by atmospheric conditions and sunspots. After years of steadily dumbing down the written exam, the last impediment to the lazy and unmotivated was removed with the advent of the "no-code license." No CW test and a written so simple that it only proved that the applicant was able to spell his name correctly at the top of the page and had an attention span long enough to have spent 30 minutes with a Q & A manual. The error was compounded by not revising the callsign allocations at he same time the "no-code" was created. Just as the old novice license had a unique callsign allocation beginning with WN and KN, the new "no code" could be assigned the block beginning with NC, followed by a two digit section number and a three letter suffix. The difficulty in using such a call on CW certainly wouldn't be a concern and most holders thereof are already used to seven element callsigns.

73, Bill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

K6UEY

10-31-2003, 04:50 AM

At least in the old days we seldom had to look down on a Novice for having a piss poor attitude, but times change ........... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

w4zaz

10-31-2003, 04:50 AM

I don't think it's a matter of who wants to use code and who doesn't,who used it or will use it.To me it's a matter of ,as one person said "Breaker Breaker 10-4".I'm a newbie but I worked pretty hard to upgrade.I am sure there are alot of guys that are determined to get their license and would "Blend Right In",as i've heard it said before; but for every one determined guy there's twenty (YAHOOS) just ready to "wear out them lower channels".

#kg4wpj

KI4BOO

10-31-2003, 05:05 AM

The "Code" Novice has an easier test than the Technition test, which requires less knowledge of theory. It just requires 5WPM code.

Novices are only allocated a tiny portion of the HF Spectrum, and for CW only. For VHF, again, a very small portion. UHF has even less. Also, they have output power restrictions.

Technitions are allocated ALL Amateur bands above 30MHz, and allowed to use ALL legal modes as well as full legal power in those bands.

Which license do YOU think is better?

K6UEY

10-31-2003, 05:20 AM

Dustin,
I think you have uncovered another faux pas by the commission, they gave the benefits to the wrong class of license......... #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
At least the Novice class, before they made it a life long ticket, had the gumption and desire to qualify as a Ham and progress to a higher class, they should have kept the Novice Class and made it back to a 1 year license and cancelled the technician, since it was never intended to be an entry class ticket.......... #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

AE6IP

10-31-2003, 06:04 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD7WHQ @ Oct. 30 2003,21:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hobbiests, true enough, but...
RACES and all it's downline hardly fit that description.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Sure they do. In fact, the only accurate description of amateur radio operators providing emergency communications is hobbiests.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Backup, and fill-in emergency communications, and comm from community centers, hospitals, and even some security in places.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

It is comments like "even some security" that give hams the "blue light and badge brigade" (wannabe) reputation with professionals.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
We can be places the public service agencies can't, as they would be spread too thin, and pass messages they can't, as they are either interservice, or personal.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah. Right. Take, for instance, the current wildfire situation in southern California. The 100 or so hams are able to get to a lot of places the 10,000 or so fire fighters and 15,000 or so emergency professionals involved can't get too.

I've always been amused by the "interservice" argument. Let me see. The cops on the scene use different radios than the firefighters on the scene, so, instead of talking to each other face to face, the cop tells a message to his ham shadow, who relays it to a network controller, who relays it to the fireman's ham shadow, who tells it to the fireman -- 45 minutes later.

Trust me, the incident command system used by most cities these days, does not work this way.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
It's a hobby, until it comes down to the wire, and then the mode shifts.
It isn't a hobby anymore, it's a service.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

It's a hobby from start to finish. You want to be in emergency services, go get trained, certified, and a professional job.

My opinion, based on direct experience, is that the average ARES/RACES netop would last about 3 minutes in a dispatcher's job.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Morse operators would be needed in adverse operating conditions which many disasters might create.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Please find me an example, in the United States, in the last 50 years, of a communication emergency, in which HF was required out of the emergency area, and CW was the only mode available.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
VHF/UHF is great for local comm, but HF is what gets out, and a number of scenarios make HF completely useless for voice.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

And yet, those scenarios turn up less often than discarded winning lottery tickets.

AE6IP

10-31-2003, 06:08 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N4WA @ Oct. 30 2003,21:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sorry to see the RAC go down that path. #Creating ANY operator class without Morse code ability in the amateur service was the most boneheaded decision that the FCC has made since creating a citizen's radio service in a frequency spectrum that can be affected by atmospheric conditions and sunspots. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

With all due respect, the mess that the FCC is making out of the transition from analog to digital TV is orders of magnitudes more boneheaded than all of the decisions they've made about personal radio services since they were chartered.

AE6IP

10-31-2003, 06:10 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6UEY @ Oct. 30 2003,21:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">At least in the old days we seldom had to look down on a Novice for having a piss poor attitude, but times change ........... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That's right. Now we have to look down on OM for having a piss poor attitude. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

ke4pjw

10-31-2003, 06:26 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6UEY @ Oct. 29 2003,21:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">F. Y. I.
73 = BEST REGARDS
73's=BEST REGARDS'ES
We used to call them NOVICE, because they lacked skill and experience !!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
On a related note, has anyone read page 101 of November's QST? Got a little giggle seeing "73's" in print as far back as the early 1920's.

KD7WHQ

10-31-2003, 06:51 AM

AE6IP, you obviously have a very different experience than I.

The ACS exercised here a few weeks back was crisp, clean, professional, and if the scenerio were real, effective.

Security? No wannabe in there at all. Merely keeping an eye on locations, and reporting any problems. Screening for ACS keeps most of them out, the rest are screened out early on. After I do the background check, etc, I'll be patrolling one of the Seattle watersheds. I'll be carrying, but only under a real situation, which is what it takes to activate the ACS. Drills, nothing but the radio. I'll just be watching.
Do I classifiy as a wannabe? I think self protection is a good idea, and in a real situation, I believe I'd be justified.

Wildfires don't apply to ACS/ all else, for obvious reasons, naturally occuring (these were mostly by arson however), unpredictable as to direction, etc. BUT, any communication out of the affected area should be relayed ASAP.

Which brings me to your "45 minute" bit.
Bluntly, BS. All messages recieved are immediately forwarded to the EOC, and it is then forwarded immediately to whomever is to handle it next. VHF/UHF/HF, no matter, that station is immediately called.

Maybe you should make a trip out here the next time an exercise is held to see how it works..

kb9vno

10-31-2003, 06:53 AM

1 word! LAZYNESS!! I dont know why you people are complaining about the reqirements on CW. Ok gauge that im 21 and it may be easer to for me to learn buti got my co worker who's about 65 to learn code. and Let's say that he's not an easy one to learn stuff and remember. I mean come on 5wpm is not that big of deal. I mean i can see the 13wpm they had before as a requirment that was a little high. but i think that 5wpm is resonable. It gives u something to work for if they made it easy everyone would have a HF lic. Including CB'ers. I think it's something neat to learn too. It's like every time i hear code i can say I know morse code. I feel proude to know it. Even though ive only used code once I still think it's a nice thing to know. When ur micraphones break and u can't do anything but key the radio on and off dont look at ur mic. dumbfounded on what to do next. And id hate to burst ur bubble i was watching something on Discovery channel or something like that on military communications something like that and found out that they still use morse code. Now if the military still uses it then why can't u? There she was with a little pocket sized radio and a straight key attached to her leg pounding out code. This was OP Iraq freedom too. I think that u people are just to lazy about learning code. You know when i went to HS they made me take a foren language. Im never going to use it so what was the point of me taking it? i still had to take it ne ways. And if u ask me Code is a lot easer to learn. Sit down 5 min. a night learn one or two letters at a time and do review and put it down for the day. takes like 10 min. a day and within like 1 week to 2 weeks u should have learned a new language and consider urself Elite. U can say u know morse code. Now that i know it it's like embeddied into my head. And u can't think about it when ur learning it just hear the sound and associate the letter. U can' think about it cuz thats where u get screwed. As you are reading all these letters now u can understand them without having to cross reference them why cuz they are all words that you know and are in ur mind. When u learn code it's just like me saying any of this. when i write the word "THE" you know what the means u dont have to think about it. When u learn code the proper way when u hear " di-dahh-dit" I automatically know the letter without thinking about it. Either u get fustrated with it and try to learn to much at one time thats why u give up. Even though code is old i still think that it's a nice requirement to learn. Like i said quit being lazy. Dont hater and be stubborn about code cuz u dont understand it. I didn't at first till i figured it out u can't think about it u just gotta know it. Plus it separates the Men from the Boys! I dont wanna hear anything about code to be eliminated I think it's a good reliable form of communicatication.

n7wsb

10-31-2003, 06:54 AM

Read the actual survey results? http://www.rac.ca/downloads/Survey_results.PDF an overwhelming majority of people wanted to drop the morse code test.

I wonder why the ARRL won't run a similar survey - maybe they are afraid of the results?

kn6z

10-31-2003, 08:43 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb9vno @ Oct. 30 2003,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You know when i went to HS they made me take a foren language.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
They should have made you take English.

10-31-2003, 11:45 AM

Is amateur radio a hobby, a service? No it’s a joke.

Who made it a joke?

Not me. The following people did though.

Those who thought the VE program and giving out all the exam answers was a good idea.

Those who pushed for Novice enhancement, ssb on upper CB channels(also known as 10 meters) along with a 10 year license.

Those who pushed for a no-code license.

Those who made the present tech the entry level.

Those who pushed for 5 wpm for the general & extra.

Those who are pushing for dropping the code exam completely.

Those who insist we need more incompetent people in our ranks because only the warm body count matters not the quality.

Now the ranks of amateur radio are filled with these people claiming to be hams, and whining that they are not accepted after having turned what was once great and RESPECTED into a joke. Do you have an amateur radio license or a useless piece of paper that says amateur radio license on it. Use the FCC’s own guidelines to find out. If the FCC says they can retest you, they recognize that you have a useless piece of paper on your wall that says amateur radio license on it.

You are a ham if you were examined at an FCC field office, know the Morse code, and can fix the radios you use and know how they work.

What’s the difference between CB,FRS, cell phone users and hams today. Not much.

Hey, you have a good day too!

Marty WB2RJR

10-31-2003, 11:53 AM

BTW, you know how a beginner can be able to repair and understand how his radio works.

You only let him operate CW...Then at least we have a chance that he knows what he's doing.

Marty WB2RJR

N3TTN

10-31-2003, 12:37 PM

Excerpt from the RAC proposal: "It also suggests that the Intermediate syllabus, in future, would include increased emphasis on operating procedures and on modern technologies...."

Modern technologies....Imagine that! Nah, I think all prospective hams should have to build and operate a spark gap transmitter to get their ticket. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

kb0ixm

10-31-2003, 12:43 PM

Anyone hear of BPL?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif People you need to pick your battles, the code/no-code debate should be on the back burner, The bigger threat is BPL. It's been said before but is worth repeating, if the power companies and the politicians have it their way this code/no-code debate will make no difference. We will all be wondering what to do with those expensive HF rigs that will be nothing but dust collectors and boat anchors. Seems to me that priorities of some need to be thought out a little bit better then they have and let the dust settle on the code debate for another time when we know we will have the opportunity to use the HF bands.
If you havent done so yet contact your congressman or woman and senators and let them know your feelings on the subject, it can only help!!!
KB0IXM
Brian

K2ACX

10-31-2003, 12:47 PM

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif9--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8WVU @ Oct. 30 2003,19http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif9)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">How many of you code lovers #ever use code? Not many.No one is saying You cant start using in the future if You want to http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Only people who actually use it are code lovers- the rest, well, I'm not going to comment. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

By the way, are you a WVU alum or is the callsign a coincidence?

Brian K2ACX

KG4CGC

10-31-2003, 01:20 PM

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif Enough already! Everyone's crazy when it comes to discussing code. No matter what part of the world you live in, no matter what the subject is, EVERY PERSON ALIVE HAS TO ARGUE, COMPLAIN AND WHINE LIKE A FIVE YEAR OLD IF THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY HEAR!
Want to use code? Then who's stopping you? Use it!
Don't care for code? Then don't use it! Who Cares?!?!?
It doesn't make a rats behind to most people. No seriously, it really doesn't. No one cares and it will not filter out the riff raff and evryone knows that to be a cold hard fact. Just listen to 75 meters coming out of the "Good ole U.S. of A."! Sounds exactly like 11 meters!
EXACTLY I said!
Most of you seem to forget the real agenda here, spectrum loss. Yes! Use it or lose it buddy, that's what it boils down to. If the FCC thinks we're not using our spectrum enough, then it's GONE! To the HIGHEST bidder! Money talks and the government wants more of it. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif Does that surprise you? Sell OUR spectrum? Guess what, it doesn't really belong to us it belongs to the government, period. I didn't make it that way and I'm sure that most of you didn't either but we could ALL lose ham radio altogether if we keep arguing this thread and INSIST on living in the past just like the Taliban.
It's 2003 folks. How do you know that the guy behind the key on the other end isn't using a keyboard to send and receive code unless he tells you? That said, what about the other modes that are far more interesting and far more technical. Let's just test for each mode. Yes, that's the answer, just test for each mode including single side band.
Guess it's just a bunch of egos that want to prove something but don't realize that there is NOTHING TO PROVE! Build a bridge...and get over it. Seriously, this code no code debate starts to sound like hate speech at times. It just does not matter, period. Code is a mode, nothing more. It will not make radio a better place for the ham masses and it hasn't. I'd prefer PSK31 and it IS more reliable than code especialy in weak signal mode.
I guess I should take a test for that too?
If you love code then just remember this, no one is trying to take your code away from you, NO ONE!
If the bands are not busy however, Big Government WILL take away our spectrum. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif Spectrum loss, IS, the real issue of ham radio today. None of us will hear each other when BPL comes to your town. You should hear all the hash and trash coming out of Atlanta and I live 300 miles away! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif Get the picture?
73 to Everyone de KG4CGC, Charles...em84

n0ov

10-31-2003, 02:32 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KI4CRA @ Oct. 29 2003,21:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I recently upgraded to general, yes thank you. #Anyway enough of that. #Is this all we're going to hear from now on? #Really people, can't we find something better to argue about! #CW is a mode of communication no more no less. #Weather we use it or not is entirely up to each person, I know some old timers who have been hams longer than I have been alive (46yrs.) and a lot of them are saying get rid of it once and for all. #I know some others who say keep it. #It never ends, it makes for some really interesting radio club meetings let me tell you.
# #All I'm trying to say is if you personally are going to use it, use it and don't try and push it down every one else's throat. #As for me I said once I get through this code test thats it no more code for me, now I'm rethinking my decision, but if I do decide to use code its MY DECISION no one else's. #Lets leave it at that.
73's # # # #
ki4cra #Mark[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
100% on the money! Coders -- keep on pounding the keys -- more power to you. Coders who chose not to -- more power to you -- keep on talking or using the digital modes.

This is a hobby folks -- can't we put this one to rest

K0RGR

10-31-2003, 03:03 PM

The editorial in this month's CQ magazine is well worth the reading. It reports the results of their recent reader poll on the code-nocode debates.

Overall, it looks like the results here were similar to those of other polls we've seen reported. A large majority of respondents favor granting HF priveleges to technicians. A very slim majority favored keeping the 5 WPM code test in place for General, and a somewhat larger majority felt it should be retained for Extra.

The interesting thing about this poll was the demographics. Over 80% of the respondents were General Class or higher. According to the editor, the group most strongly in favor of granting HF priveleges to Techs was the Extras!

So, it is not the no-coders who are 'whining' - it is us Extras! Perhaps the hams who have the most invested in ham radio in terms of time and activity are the ones most concerned with seeing it continue to grow and flourish. Maybe if you've sent 20 WPM with a straight key in front of a frowning FCC examiner, you begin to question the need for the whole thing. Maybe the silence of the bands late at night is too disturbing to those who remember 20 and 40 meters in the 60's.

n3jbh

10-31-2003, 03:05 PM

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif now i may be wrong here but is not it the purpose of the hobby to advanze the skill,s and the knowledge of the art of radio and it,s improvemts through experimtation and discovery of better techniques??? or is it that we shall all stay with spark gaps and laden jars and xtal sets??? i have not yet seen a reason why code no code in the times of today need to be a reqiurment. hmmmmmm but then i drive a car to instead of walking so maybe i am lil to modern for the times. well old timers please respond tel me i am wrong de/n3jbh http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

NQ4S

10-31-2003, 03:37 PM

Same old arguements, same old extreme positions. #I fear that QRZ has dropped to the level of Yahoo message boards these days.

The results of people who took the time to respond to the FCC petions are probably more indicative of the real attitude out there. #From the response level, a majority of people gavitated towards the NCVEC option.

Now, I'll go back to working FM, SSB, RTTY, Packet and a few other modes that interest me.

To each his own.

73 de NQ4S

N7XCF

10-31-2003, 06:01 PM

I think the CW snobs may be on to something ie. the license is too easy to get. I think the best way to weed out the idiots and noncomps is to require the demonstrated ability to design and construct your own rig before you are allowed on the air.

Eric N7XCF http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

w6th

10-31-2003, 06:27 PM

.................................K6euy............ ...........................
As you say:
73 = BEST REGARDS
73's=BEST REGARDS'ES:

Then why do many say best 73's which means best best 73's or best best regards? Not novices as a novice is a beginner and I have heard many novice class say 73 and no best ahead of the 73.

All this code no code is a lack of education, just read the nonsense that goes on, on this qrz.com for the past year or so.

Forget the code and the written exams and buy a transceiver and get on the hf bands as many are doing today. Knowing that you purchased a radio could be what is more needed and expected than to have a ham ticket Money talks and #**** walks.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #73

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #...

KD7YMR

10-31-2003, 06:33 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N7XCF @ Oct. 31 2003,11http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think the CW snobs may be on to something ie. the license is too easy to get. I think the best way to weed out the idiots and noncomps is to require the demonstrated ability to design and construct your own rig before you are allowed on the air.

Eric N7XCF <!--emo&http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Oh HECK yes! . . . #AND build your own generator or battery pack from scratch. . . #Mine your own copper and make your own wire, and then squish a bunch of beetles to make insulating varnish . . . #And then you can chip a little germanium off a bolder in a cave and bend a safety pin for the crystal! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

#This is the 22ed century already!

#There is NO reason for any of that sort of squabbling nowadays. #We have it all. #There’s no need to restrict any form of communications for another. #It’s ALL good stuff! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

#Another common HAM:
# # # # KD7YMR

VE3RPF

10-31-2003, 07:01 PM

I really don't care if the code goes or not and what kind of amateur will result from it. #There will always be good and bad ops. #I'm in this hobby for myself and will still use CW regardless if CW is kept or not. #There will still be a lot of other ops to talk with and those of lesser stature, well they will be avoided as they are now. #When I say lesser stature I don't mean those who don't use CW, I'm talking about those with poor operating habits and disregard for the rules.

Robert VE3RPF

kc5jpz

10-31-2003, 07:09 PM

Here are my hopes for the Amateur Radio Service (ARS) in the United States of America:

1. #Telegraph tests for HF operation would be eliminated.
2. #Telegraph only bands would be protected...for at least one hundred years.
3. #The "Thats a big QSL good buddy" types would stop sounding like 11-Meter CBrs and would learn that "QSL, 73, 88, 69, QTH, QSY etc. are for telegraph use.
4. #I hope that there are others like me who will start listening to HF and MF, after the telegraph exams go away, with the aim of learning the most popular of telegraph codes.
5. #The question pools would no longer be available to the general public. #We do not need to give a license to someone just because they memorized the answers to the questions.
6. #The operator classes would be renamed:
The "Amateur Extra Big Boy" class would be called "Class A"
The "Avanced" class would be called "Class B"
The "General" class would be called "Class C"
The "Technician" class would be called "Class D"
The "Novice" class would keep the name "Novice"

ke7mbl

10-31-2003, 07:51 PM

I don't like the code myself. The people who are
against the dropping the code requirement are
afraid of progress. They only #want that small
corner on HF to themselves. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

K6UEY

10-31-2003, 08:37 PM

KE7MBL,
Not sure where you get your information" but what we have here is a failure to communicate".
Those who want to retain the code are all for progress, if they were not, you would not have a service to bitch about. Where do you think Ham Radio came from? #You don't still believe in the Easter Bunny do you ??
As to wanting a small portion of HF for themselves, they are only protecting what was already theirs, earned by the work of building it over the years, so that some day some young non-appreciative, GIMME, youngster could come along and attempt to steal it.
If you want to use the HF benefits, it is there open to any one who is willing , and able to earn it. If YOU are not up to the task that is a personal decision, maybe you are not Ham Radio material, maybe you don't possess the desire and dedication to QUALIFY for a Ham Ticket. Don't run down those who have displayed their qualifications, when it is YOUR #FAILURE, that keeps you on the outside looking in . # # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

AE6IP

10-31-2003, 09:06 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6UEY @ Oct. 31 2003,13:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">KE7MBL,
Not sure where you get your information" but what we have here is a failure to communicate".
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Those who want to retain the code are all for progress, if they were not, you would not have a service to bitch about. Where do you think Ham Radio came from?
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The pumpkin patch, just like the Great Pumpkin?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
You don't still believe in the Easter Bunny do you ??
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

At my age, I don't even believe in the Playboy Bunny.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
As to wanting a small portion of HF for themselves, they are only protecting what was already theirs, earned by the work of building it over the years, so that some day some young non-appreciative, GIMME, youngster could come along and attempt to steal it.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The OM built the RF spectrum? And here I thought it was a consequence of the collapse of the Higgs field. Who knew?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
If you want to use the HF benefits, it is there open to any one who is willing , and able to earn it. If YOU are not up to the task that is a personal decision, maybe you are not Ham Radio material, maybe you don't possess the desire and dedication to QUALIFY for a Ham Ticket.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

It has finally dawned me that CW is the Miller Light of ham radio. "Less difficult to learn!" "More dedictation to learn!"

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Don't run down those who have displayed their qualifications, when it is YOUR #FAILURE, that keeps you on the outside looking in . # # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Does that mean it's ok for me to run down those who have displayed their qualifications since I'm inside looking out?

(No, no, no, he's outside, looking in. -- The Moody Blues)

AnoneMouse

10-31-2003, 09:40 PM

Do you see what dumbing down ham radio has done? It enabled any knucklehead to be able to obtain a cheap Extra class license from square one. All one has to do to obtain an Extra today from a cold start is to memorize the question pools for Technician, General and Extra, and learn a mere 5 words per minute Morse code. AE6IP did this all within the same month way back in Sept. 2002 and now parades around these forums as the ultimate know-it-all. I'd like to know what class of license AE6IP would have if the FCC was still using pre-4/2000 standards. Most likely, he would be the proud owner of a Technician Plus ticket. In my eyes, this man has very little experience as a ham, and knows just as little. It is no wonder that he advocates eliminating the Morse requirement. I'm quite sure that the last dits and dahs that he copied was during his Morse exam. Take all that this man has to say with a grain of salt, knowing his level of experience and the number of months he has been a ham (slightly less than 14). 73 DE AnoneMouse http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

WA9SVD

10-31-2003, 09:44 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6UEY @ Oct. 30 2003,22:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Dustin,
I think you have uncovered another faux pas by the commission, they gave the benefits to the wrong class of license......... #:p
At least the Novice class, before they made it a life long ticket, had the gumption and desire to qualify as a Ham and progress to a higher class, they should have kept the Novice Class and made it back to a 1 year license and cancelled the technician, since it was never intended to be an entry class ticket.......... #:([/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I'm a bit puzzled. If the Tech license was NOT meant to be an entry class license, then it had to be considered a permanent (lifelong) license class. WHY cancel the Tech license? It WAS originally designed for those that wished to experiment on the VHF and above frequencies.

AE6IP

10-31-2003, 10:10 PM

Well, whaddya know, it's my fan club, back for its 3rd post ever on QRZ.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AnoneMouse @ Oct. 31 2003,14:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Do you see what dumbing down ham radio has done? It enabled any knucklehead to be able to obtain a cheap Extra class license from square one. All one has to do to obtain an Extra today from a cold start is to memorize the question pools for Technician, General and Extra, and learn a mere 5 words per minute Morse code.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I found it much simpler to merely understand the material, rather than memorize the 1200 questions in the combined pool.

In fact, the only element that requires rote memorization is element 1.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
I'd like to know what class of license AE6IP would have if the FCC was still using pre-4/2000 standards.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Just plain old Tech, since my starting interest was EMCOMM, and plain old Tech is just fine for that.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Most likely, he would be the proud owner of a Technician Plus ticket. In my eyes, this man has very little experience as a ham, and knows just as little.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

There's nothing on the internet that demonstrates that you are making your point so clearly as being the subject of an ad-hominem attack from an anonymous poster.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
It is no wonder that he advocates eliminating the Morse requirement. I'm quite sure that the last dits and dahs that he copied was during his Morse exam.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

You are sure of a lot of things that turn out to be wrong. I would probably post anonymously if I were so often so wrong, too.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Take all that this man has to say with a grain of salt, knowing his level of experience and the number of months he has been a ham (slightly less than 14). 73 DE AnoneMouse http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

And someone said irony was dead.

73

Marty AE6IP

K6UEY

10-31-2003, 10:35 PM

WA9SVD,
Your right Larry, the original Technician license was meant to be an experimenters license, it required the same Technical expertise as the General class ticket, actually it was the same exam with the exception the CW requirement was limited to RX and TX of 5 WPM code .The term at that time was 4 years renewable, where upon the Novice ticket theory was mostly Rules and Regs, but did have a 5 WPM code test.The term for the Novice was 1 year, NON Renewable, it was strictly an entry level ticket to allow some experience to be gained and the code profeciency to be acquired to be able to pass the 13 WPM code test for the General class ticket, which you had to Hold for, as I remember 2 years before you could apply for the Extra test which had advanced theory and 20 WPM code test.
When they watered down the Technician license it lost all validity, it was no longer a technical experimenters ticket and it did not qualify as an entry level, it became a bastard class that would not fit any where. It only became an entry level by default, for those who could not or would not qualify for a normal Ham license.The CW qualification was an essential part of the Experimental class of ticket, as those who set the VHF/UHF/Microwave records do so, not with phone (SSB) until they have first established the record by the use of CW, which only stands to reason from a technical point of view. Considering the level of Technical expertise in the current applicants and the fact the Technican ticket no longer serves the purpose it was originally intended for, they should have kept the Novice and dropped the Technican, in my opinion.
ENJOY!! The days on the calendar are already accounted for .....73, #ORV
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

kc8ojn

11-01-2003, 12:51 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc5jpz @ Oct. 31 2003,12:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">6. The operator classes would be renamed:
The "Amateur Extra Big Boy" class would be called "Class A"
The "Avanced" class would be called "Class B"
The "General" class would be called "Class C"
The "Technician" class would be called "Class D"
The "Novice" class would keep the name "Novice"[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
FYI...The Novice and Advanced classes have been eliminated and grandfathered into Technician and General, respectively.

kc8ojn

11-01-2003, 01:00 AM

Also, what if someone doesn't have time to learn CW (i.e. school)?

Donning the flame retardant suit as I type.

KH2D

11-01-2003, 04:21 AM

Also, what if someone doesn't have time to learn CW (i.e. school)?

That's a good question. Let's think about that.....

If you don't have time to learn to drive a car, you don't get a driver's license.

If you don't have time to go to medical school, you don't get a doctor's license.

If you don't have time to learn real estate laws, you don't get a real estate license.

If you don't have time to take a bath, you might stink.

But seems to me, in the case of ham radio, we should make exceptions for people that don't have time to learn CW. Give them a CW Lack Of Time Exemption. But then if they don't have time to learn CW, they probably don't have time to learn electronics theory or FCC rules either, so I guess we should also give them a Written Test Lack Of Time Exemption too....

In all the years we've been discussing this Morse code stuff, I've seem some really bad excuses for keeping it and some really bad excuses for getting rid of it, but I definitly think we should give you the:

A1 Operator Best Excuse Ever For Not Learning Morse Code Award

Cuz you don't have TIME. Duh. Try this. Turn off the computer, and use all the TIME you spend reading QRZ's Ikonbored Disgusting Forums for something else. If that doesn't work, try this.......

Wait. Sooner or later, you too will be able to obtain any amateur radio license you desire without learning Morse code. Trust me, you won't be waiting alone.

Maybe if you're lucky, they'll even do that with school someday - and you can get a diploma without learning anything. Wow, just think of all the time you'd have if you didn't have to go to school........

73, Jim KH2D

KH2D

11-01-2003, 04:40 AM

Just plain old Tech, since my starting interest was EMCOMM, and plain old Tech is just fine for that.

Should we assume that since the extra class ticket you now have was easier to obtain than what it once was in the past, you are now interested in more? Or did you just upgrade for some imaginary OT points?

AnonyMouse apparently doesn't understand Newton's Law Of Amateur Radio Knowledge And Time, which simply states that the amount of knowledge that an individual has about amateur radio is inversely proportional to the amount of time that the individual has been licensed.

That's what I like about QRZ's Ikonbored Forums - I get to meet all these new guys and I can learn SO much from them......

And glad to see you're back, too!!

73, Jim KH2D

kc8ykl

11-01-2003, 05:44 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc8ojn @ Oct. 31 2003,18:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, what if someone doesn't have time to learn CW (i.e. school)?

Donning the flame retardant suit as I type.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
SCHOOL?? How about a wife, a nine year old son, school activities, homework, basketball practice for the nine year old, basketball games, yard work, family time in general, being self employed?? I could go on and on here, but it only take's 15 - 20 minute's a day and I'm sure you can find that by not reading every single post here on QRZ, HI HI.

Good luck, 73 :)

n9nds

11-01-2003, 06:54 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc8ojn @ Oct. 31 2003,18<!--emo&http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, what if someone doesn't have time to learn CW (i.e. school)?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I don't think that this excuse is a valid reason for dropping the code requirements. #I also don't see keeping the code completely as a requirement for HF privleges. #I was licensed as a Tech No-Code back in 1991. #I started then and there learning code. #I was in college and had a full-time job. #By 1996 I had a wife, kids, and a full-time job but no HF privleges. #It is now 2003 and I have, just this summer, finally passed the code. #I have a wife, kids, volunteer work, full-time job, and go to college again part-time. #It took a lot of juggling but I eventually got it done.

The reasons that everyone lists for why they have no time to learn the code are valid. #However if you want the privleges you can find and arrange the time to complete the task. #I was able to pass mine (barely, solid copy only). #It took me a month. #I now try to make some contacts every week on CW and I find the profeciency getting better. #Get a code practice osscilator and do CW with someone on 2m FM simplex. #It can be done. #My 12 years of time struggles and 6 attempts during that time are proof that it is possible.

73 de N9NDS
Brad

n7wsb

11-01-2003, 07:02 AM

On having time...

I find with all the work I do day in day out (I work in a tech support factory - which are typically very stressful) I find that I have little or time for amateur radio in general. To be honest I haven't turned on the mobile in months - same with my base station.

Often times after work I'm so tired of talking to people (and some people aren't very polite and have no manners) all day and dealing with management that I rather have a bath and go to sleep.

This goes back to a deeper problem in American society in general. There's less people doing all the work now, so personal productivity goes up - but then there's less time for other things. This is definately a downward trend as more and more companies look overseas to outsourcing companies to do their work for them.

I think to do any meaningful study one needs to be in the right mindset - and yes that does take a lot of resources and time. When you're going to school to earn a degree, or to medical school at most your working in a part time job (this is what I did) where most of my availble time was spent studying. Or if you have a good enough grant/scholarship you may not need to work a part time job while working on your degree.

There's nothing out there that lets you afford the energy to devote to studying morse code everyday unless you're retired, unemployed, or still in high school.

kc5jpz

11-01-2003, 07:05 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc8ojn @ Oct. 31 2003,11:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">FYI...The Novice and Advanced classes have been eliminated and grandfathered into #Technician and General, respectively.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
FYI...You're wrong. #Novice is Novice for as long as the few Novice class operators renew the license or until the FCC makes a change. #Same with the Advanced class license.

AE6IP

11-01-2003, 07:07 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KH2D @ Oct. 31 2003,21:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just plain old Tech, since my starting interest was EMCOMM, and plain old Tech is just fine for that.

Should we assume that since the extra class ticket you now have was easier to obtain than what it once was in the past, you are now interested in more? Or did you just upgrade for some imaginary OT points?
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

What are imaginary OT points?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
AnonyMouse apparently doesn't understand Newton's Law Of Amateur Radio Knowledge And Time, which simply states that the amount of knowledge that an individual has about amateur radio is inversely proportional to the amount of time that the individual has been licensed.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Hmm... and I just thought it was that amateur radio has so little content that it was trivial to learn compared to other interests that I have.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
That's what I like about QRZ's Ikonbored Forums - I get to meet all these new guys and I can learn SO much from them......
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

With all due respect, you don't do sarcasm very well. Perhaps you should leave it to the new guys.

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

n9zxk

11-01-2003, 12:42 PM

why do i get the feeling here that some people feel if they do away with the code test, that code it self will be gone too. i have seen other peoples post. some think they want to ban code. for what i take it that isnt true. i might be wrong, but i only have saw where they want to take it away as a test.

i have seen poeple say make all the test harder, make them do this, do that. the fcc dont care who gets into ham radio. thats all bs. why do these people have new radios and computers for. i cant forget about the internet. i think the old timers ( not putting anyone down ) should take a good long look at ham radio in itself. where do you want to see it in 50 years. not just for us , for our kids and grandkids

i dont know whow many new hams we get in a year, but dont thet start out as a no code tech? tell me if im wrong. didnt we all start out at the bottom. to me i think you should be able to work the modes you want and test on that. if you want just voice so be it, cw so be it or both so be it

i know right about now a few of you are getting ready to blast me. thats cool. take a look at nascar. they still do the samething as they did 40 years ago. that is race cars, but they have changed didnt they. it did them good. so a change isnt so bad after all.

is it really about the code, i dont think so. i think its more of we dont want the so called bad ones here in ham radio. how about trying to find a way to help the fcc fine the one who needs to be. do what some states do if you get so many tickets in a year you get your rights takin away. there has to be something done so all of us can get along

K6UEY

11-01-2003, 12:59 PM

KC8OJN,
Nick where in heavens name did you come up with the asinine idea that the Advance class License was down graded to General class. No the Advance class and the Novice ticket are both very valid tickets and as stated as long as they are renewed they will stay that way. If it was to be grandfathered it would have to have a completely new class of Extra Plus, if measured by today's Standards. Most of the Adavanced class holders took a theory test much harder than the present Extra and were required a 13 WPM code test, not like the present 5 WPM, and a large number took the test from an FCC Field Engineer at the FCC office.
Since you carry around your little HT and play the role of Ham Radio you might want to do a little study of some of the recent history of Ham Radio, just in case some one ask's you what it is about ....... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

N5KNR

11-01-2003, 01:40 PM

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif # #The World Wide Dummy-Down Campaign marches on. #No longer do we hold skill in its former place of honor. #Now we aim for the lowest common denominator.[B]

K0ZZE

11-01-2003, 01:52 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb0ixm @ Oct. 31 2003,07:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Anyone hear of BPL?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif #People you need to pick your battles, the code/no-code debate should be on the back burner, #The bigger threat is BPL. #It's been said before but is worth repeating, if the power companies and the politicians have it their way this code/no-code debate will make no difference. #We will all be wondering what to do with those expensive HF rigs that will be nothing but dust collectors and boat anchors. #Seems to me that priorities of some need to be thought out a little bit better then they have and let the dust settle on the code debate for another time when we know we will have the opportunity to use the HF bands.
If you havent done so yet contact your congressman or woman and senators and let them know your feelings on the subject, it can only help!!!
KB0IXM
Brian[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
i agree, so i have stated several times before. but no one listens.it would realy suck to go out and by a new hf rig having just passed that no code hf test just to hear a bunch of trashy noise at 20 over s9!!!!!!!!!!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

W9JCM

11-01-2003, 02:50 PM

If it does happen I would LOVEEE to see them have to take re exams to get on HF digital only. NO VOICE

W9JCM

11-01-2003, 02:52 PM

K6UEYs comment "Most of the Adavanced class holders took a theory test much harder than the present Extra "

Todays Extra exam has the Old Advanced Class and Extra classes tests together.

G8RLD

11-01-2003, 03:01 PM

Having spent some time looking at the continuing correspondence on morse as a requirement for HF, I would suggest that a much more urgent need is a requirement for a better educational standard. The standard of spelling and grammar is unbelievably bad. It is now to the point that I would rather my wife didn't view the semi-literate ramblings of many correspondents. She has already commented on the language and attitudes of operators on HF anyway!
Let us not forget that it is only a hobby, and that IS exactly what it is, but it is a hobby with a difference. You are heard abroad, and in that respect you/we are ambassadors for our country. Listening on 80m and often 20m the impression is not good. This applies on-air and posted messages.
Forget the nonsense of requiring morse code and the accusations of laziness for not learning morse code - why not spend some time learning even some basic grammar and punctuation, or is that somehow not laziness. I'm still amazed at the 11 line message in this forum recently, without a hint of punctuation from start to finish!
I was licensed in 1978 and no, I haven't got morse as a qualification. However, I have operated satellites, digital, 6m SSB, 2m SSB and always, I hope in a professional manner.I never normally post messages but I am so frustrated at the mentality of many (fortunately not the majority) correspondents that are making this hobby into something that is becoming less pleasant to participate in.
I'm sure this post will be pulled apart in more ways than one, but at least for once I have made my comment!
73
Robert

N8UZE

11-01-2003, 05:43 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc8ojn @ Oct. 31 2003,19:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif9--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc5jpz @ Oct. 31 2003,12http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif9)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">6. #The operator classes would be renamed:
The "Amateur Extra Big Boy" class would be called "Class A"
The "Avanced" class would be called "Class B"
The "General" class would be called "Class C"
The "Technician" class would be called "Class D"
The "Novice" class would keep the name "Novice"[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
FYI...The Novice and Advanced classes have been eliminated and grandfathered into #Technician and General, respectively.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
FYI
The Novice and Advanced classes have not been eliminated and have not been grandfathered to any other class. It is simply that no new licenses are being issued in these classes. The existing Novice and Advanced class licensees keep exactly the same privileges as they had prior to the April 2000 restructuring. They can continue to renew indefinitely as Novice or Advanced class as the case may be. They may choose to upgrade by TESTING. No class of license gained or lost any privileges in the April 2000 restructuring. No class or license was grandfathered into any other class.

N8UZE

11-01-2003, 05:44 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc8ojn @ Oct. 31 2003,20:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, what if someone doesn't have time to learn CW (i.e. school)?

Donning the flame retardant suit as I type.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Then you either make time to study or you wait same as with the written tests.

AE6IP

11-01-2003, 06:33 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">took the test from an FCC Field Engineer at the FCC office.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I've taken tests from FCC at the FCC office and I've taken tests from VEs at VE sessions.

The only thing I can say to those who think there's a significant difference is that I'm sorry that you have such a high degree of test anxiety.

73,

Marty

AnoneMouse

11-01-2003, 07:59 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AE6IP @ Oct. 31 2003,01:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
AnonyMouse apparently doesn't understand Newton's Law Of Amateur Radio Knowledge And Time, which simply states that the amount of knowledge that an individual has about amateur radio is inversely proportional to the amount of time that the individual has been licensed.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Hmm... and I just thought it was that amateur radio has so little content that it was trivial to learn compared to other interests that I have.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
So, amateur radio has so little content that it was trivial to learn compared to other interests that you have?

We are obviously in the presence of the Almighty, who knoweth all things. Behold the Lamb of God who taketh away BPL from the world! Lord Marty is here to save amateur radio from BPL and all the rest of its ills. Now I know that it is best for code testing to cease. Lord Marty said so.

73 DE AnoneMouse http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

ei5ja

11-01-2003, 08:28 PM

When they've all fallen, just watch the lower frequencies vanish into the commercial morass. You have been warned. (And not for the first time)

73
Ed http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

K6UEY

11-01-2003, 08:43 PM

ED EI5JA,
Well here in the states it probably will go unnoticed, depending on how many OT's are still around at the time. It would seem the new generation is quite happy living in the world of 2 meter repeaters and the present qualifications to operate on HF are TOO HARD !
So until such time as the FCC ups the ante on the new Amateur Radio welfare program the new generation will probably not give it a passing glance. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

KB1HVS

11-01-2003, 09:43 PM

BPL? Put this anger toward the real enemy. BPL. Lets Go! Write those letters to you local govenment reps! Screw this debate. BTW. I do Code! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

WA9SVD

11-01-2003, 10:06 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N8UZE @ Nov. 01 2003,10:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[
FYI
The Novice and Advanced classes have not been eliminated and have not been grandfathered to any other class. #It is simply that no new licenses are being issued in these classes. #The existing Novice and Advanced class licensees keep exactly the same privileges as they had prior to the April 2000 restructuring. #They can continue to renew indefinitely as Novice or Advanced class as the case may be. #They may choose to upgrade by TESTING. #No class of license gained or lost any privileges in the April 2000 restructuring. #No class or license was grandfathered into any other class.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
N8UZE:

One slight correction: You are partly correct to say that no one was "grandfathered in April 2000." Nothing was automatic. But after 15 April 2000, Tech Class operators licensed before 1978 could apply for an upgrade to General without further testing. That is because they all had passed the 5 WPM exam (many in front of FCC examiners) AND they had passed the SAME written exam as Generals. There was NO 'Tech" written exam at the time; the Tech exam was identical to General. Thus, they had the same written exam credit as Generals, and with the change to 5 WPM code speed, they had also fulfilled the Element 1 requirement. But they still had to go to a VE Session, fill out the form, and pay their $.

WA9SVD

11-01-2003, 10:47 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6UEY @ Oct. 31 2003,15:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">WA9SVD,
Your right Larry, the original Technician license was meant to be an experimenters license, it required the same Technical expertise as the General class ticket, actually it was the same exam with the exception the CW requirement was limited to RX and TX of 5 WPM code .The term at that time was 4 years renewable, where upon the Novice ticket theory was mostly Rules and Regs, but did have a 5 WPM code test.The term for the Novice was 1 year, NON Renewable, it was strictly an entry level ticket to allow some experience to be gained and the code profeciency to be acquired to be able to pass the 13 WPM code test for the General class ticket, which you had to Hold for, as I remember 2 years before you could apply for the Extra test which had advanced theory and 20 WPM code test.
When they watered down the Technician license it lost all validity, it was no longer a technical experimenters ticket and it did not qualify as an entry level, it became a bastard class that would not fit any where. It only became an entry level by default, for those who could not or would not qualify for a normal Ham license.The CW qualification was an essential part of the Experimental class of ticket, as those who set the VHF/UHF/Microwave records do so, not with phone (SSB) until they have first established the record by the use of CW, which only stands to reason from a technical point of view. Considering the level of Technical expertise in the current applicants and the fact the Technican ticket no longer serves the purpose it was originally intended for, they should have kept the Novice and dropped the Technican, in my opinion.
ENJOY!! The days on the calendar are already accounted for .....73, #ORV
???[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I pretty much agree. I remember going to the Chicago Federal Building in '66 to take my exam, and a LONG six weeks to get that Tech Ticket in my hands. Back then, almost ALL gear above was homebrew, as there wasn't any commercial Amateur gear. (At least not affordable,) and 1.2 GHz and above were mere gleams in people's eyes. Now, it's "off the shelf." Times change. But I definitely agree, the experimenters learned the code by necessity, not by requirement. I knew quite a few (and still know some) operators who never bothered to upgrade to General, even though they were using code on UHF and later the microwaves, because they saw no reason. They were doing what they wanted, and the Tech was good enough for their purposes.
It's time to check for the 6 Meter openings again. It's more fun than HF anyway. (But I AM now an Extra.)73 and good operating to all.

W5HTW

11-01-2003, 11:03 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N8UZE @ Nov. 01 2003,10:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc8ojn @ Oct. 31 2003,20:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, what if someone doesn't have time to learn CW (i.e. school)?

Donning the flame retardant suit as I type.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Then you either make time to study or you wait same as with the written tests.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I agree! If you don't have time to study, you don't have time to ham. Get your priorities straight. Do the education, get the job, then, when you have time, get a ham ticket. But don't use time as your excuse. Lots of us got tickets while working, while in school, traveling, etc. If you don't feel you have the time, then do what you DO have the time for - your education.

Hey, the G8. Man you have it pinned down nicely! People can't spell, write, punctuate or communicate. No wonder they are against the code - that would require at least some rudimentary knowledge of spelling. I've said in several places I think the idea of being too lazy to learn the code is merely indicative of the fact Americans are too lazy to learn anything, including grade school subjects. So it carries over to adulthood. It is a learned trait - the thing they learn is how to avoid learning! Of course, the schools aren't exactly stellar examples of teaching, either, when a good many of the teachers can't write halfway decent English. My wife works at a school, and I have good knowledge of the lack of education being fostered upon us, a lot of it in the interest of "Hey, Joey can't pass the test, so let's make it really simple so Joey CAN pass." (I think that's called 'dumbing down!) Of course, the smart kids in the class sit with their thumbs up their noses, as they finished the test before Joey even gets awake good. But the whole class has to be geared to the slowest student.

Hey! That sounds familiar, doesn't it?!! Wow, maybe we hams learned something after all -- how to be "Joey."

Re: license classes. I doubt the current Extra test encompasses the old Advanced, but I think one has to define the term "old." The Advanced test of the sixties was a heck of a test! Some likened it to the First Phone ticket, but that may be a stretch. Then again, we may be comparing apples to doughnuts. Testing on how to program a PC, or set up a LAN or understand TCP was not on the old test. But then again, that test was about radio not computers.

Most Novices of today know more than recently licensed Extras. More code, certainly, but more importantly, they know more theory, too. And have a HECK of a lot more experience. Kind of a role reversal - let the Novice "elmer" the Extra, as the Extra doesn't even know how to use an ohmmeter. (In fact, I think we should do away with the pointless Extra Class ticket entirely and make everyone "Amateur Radio Operator." But that's for another thread!) The Extra - the Teacher - (like in our public schools) has no idea what he's doing.

I think in the next restructuring (coming soon to a VE session near you) we WILL see a single class of license, though possibly with certain endorsements, such as "Antique radio" for those interested in boat anchors. What the heck, maybe even a CW endorsement? "Amateur Radio Operator with CW/Boat Anchor endorsement." Like your driver's license, with motorcycle endorsement.

Ed

AE6IP

11-01-2003, 11:08 PM

More from the peanut gallery:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AnoneMouse @ Nov. 01 2003,12:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
We are obviously in the presence of the Almighty, who knoweth all things. Behold the Lamb of God who taketh away BPL from the world! Lord Marty is here to save amateur radio from BPL and all the rest of its ills. Now I know that it is best for code testing to cease. Lord Marty said so.

73 DE AnoneMouse #<!--emo&http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

It's a burden having such a fan club, but I carry it for the good of the hobby. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

73

Marty
AE6IP

KH2D

11-02-2003, 12:31 AM

When they've all fallen, just watch the lower frequencies vanish into the commercial morass. You have been warned. (And not for the first time)

Is Brown tired of 220 and just chomping at the bit to put all their trucks on 75 meter SSB ?

73, Jim KH2D

K0ZZE

11-02-2003, 12:53 AM

another pointless thread. and go ahead and email me again for posting ROBERT. i enjoy the endless number of brain cells you lack. maybe one day insted of emailing me and calling me a lazy a$$ no code spouting off at the mouth you might try to get to know me before you make such comment's. the countless night's i have spent learning code on the G4FON program taught me that just about any one can learn the code, even if its at 2 wpm. i am currantly at 13wpm. it took some time but im sure i will pass no prob. and as far as the wise cracks about lazy no codes not wanting to learn the code cuz they can't spell is,well need i say more? i can't spell worth a darn and i still can copy the code fine. although i find it a lot easy'er to send at that rate then it is to copy it. i still miss some things at 13wpm but im getting better.being harrased by a general or extra or even a advance ham before they even ofer to elmer is ludicrus.my ideas to some might be seen as radical or maybe it is the same as other hams that already hold a higher license. any way the countless emails and countless bashings i have taken is all been stored into my memory. it is a sad day in ham radio when we ARGUE about such crap.people can and always be cruel and insensitve to other's as time passes on that's life right? wrong!! any way i wonder how many more people email other people and criticize them for being them. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif i will be joining the general ranks soon, so se the knowledgable people that care about other people on hf.

--... ...-- -.- -.-. ----- --.- -- . .-.-.-

ke2iv

11-02-2003, 02:46 AM

Oh No!

The old C vs. NC again!!!

What I'd like to know is how come the pro-Coders are never on the air? #Ever listen down there on the CW portions of 80M or 20M?

I guess there not xmitting anymore because they are always here "clogging the website" here with their constant whining.

There is only one real issue left. #Do we let HR die by demanding retention of CW as a licensing requirement?

The number of new hams coming into the activity is pitiful - and, more often than not, consists of aging seniors who won't be around much longer anyway! #Ham radio is becoming like clay molding - a retirement hobby!

Go to a middle or high school and try and sell HR with a telegraph key. #[And don't give me the BS about the three kids who momentarily think "it's cool" before they go back to text messaging each other on their cell phones!]

Yeah right!

dit dididit dead - that's HR if this keeps going on.

40 years a ham with Extra Class,
KE2IV

w0tut

11-02-2003, 03:35 AM

I'm back in the saddle again , toting my ole
44!!! (no its my J-38)

73 and Happy CW hamming de Joe w0tut

ve3jev

11-02-2003, 04:16 AM

hi you all , why each for what they like in mode of operating be cw or ssb , i find cw easy to get your message to other's,with little power output.and i find you get more qrm from ssb.anyways i vote who cares if they drop morse code,old die harts on cw will still be there and happy to chat with you. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

VA2VA

11-02-2003, 08:30 AM

Hello from Canada,

VE3WBZ, I agree with you when you say: «If code was so great, why did the real pioneer hams, work to develope AM, FM and SSB. They obviously wanted better things for the hobby. They wanted to hear and now see whom they were talking to and hear their voice.

«If more hams can get on HF, and enjoy the hobby , then this is great. There is no threat to code, one needs but to spin the dial and listen and hear the code...still in use and being enjoyed.»

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

VE3BEE, I agree with you too when you say: «My operation is about 95 percent cw. But don't think a code test should be a restriction too operate on HF bands.»

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

Now here is a copy of my recent letter to Radio Amateur of Canada:

«Dear Sir :

After reading the recent Interim Report of the RAC Ad hoc committee on radio amateur qualifications, I feel the need to express my astonishment at the following recommendation:

«Recommendation 2

RAC should recommend to Industry Canada that, at the same time as Recommendation 1 comes into force, the achievement of a grade of at least 80% on the Basic examination will be required in order to be permitted to operate in the bands below 30 MHz. Achievement of at least 80% will lead to a new qualification to be called the Intermediate Qualification. Holders of the present Basic plus Morse Qualification will be deemed to hold the Intermediate Qualification...»

My comment : I do not believe RAC can put on an equal foot a current radioamateur who has passed his Basic exam with only 60% + the morse code test and any future radioamateur who will be required to achieve at least 80% on the Basic exam in order to access the HF bands. If this recommendation comes into effect, I think most current Basic with no code radioamateurs will rather choose the morse code exam instead of trying to achieve the 80% pass mark. Think about it, not everybody is making a career in electronics!! Am I more knowledgeable in the theory of electronics because I succeed in the morse code exam? NO!

Therefore: 60% pass mark + morse code DOES NOT EQUAL 80% pass mark (better understanding of electronics).

Finally, I am particularly not satisfied with recommendation 2. I believe it is unfair for the above reasons. Would this recommendation come into effect, I would think about not renewing my RAC membership.»

Best regards!

Mario

KD5ZEW

11-02-2003, 10:52 AM

I understand that a lot of hams are upset that they removed the entry-level license code requirement but if you haven't noticed there are not many new hams, especially young ones these days. I am 22 and have been a ham for a whopping 4 weeks now. One thing you should realize is that the #1 best way BY FAR to learn the code is with the help of another ham. Do you seriously think this generation is going to spend hundreds of dollars to buy equipment they don’t understand and try to learn all of the basics plus code with no help? If more young hams do not start joining ham radio will start dieing off regardless of the code situation. I strongly believe that in order to bring new hams into this fine tradition they need a little push, hence the technician class. I myself am getting all of my help learning CW from on the air practice. The first thing I thought when I became a new ham was how great all these people are... they are always willing to help, but for some reason when it comes to the code/no code issue people get angry, petty and down right rude... not something that attracts new people to our pastime. You think it's bad now; the way the FCC is killing your radio privileges, wait till they see the number of new hams dropping like rocks.
I most definitely believe that if someone is willing to learn the code they should be rewarded for their efforts with. But we shouldn't look down on those who have not learned the code yet. For those of you out there who know code you may not have had a had time learning it or you may have forgotten how hard it was but like they say it's a whole other language. And some people just don't pick it up as fast. My personal feeling are that people should be able to get to get their feet wet without having to swim across the whole ocean just to get a taste of ham (radio). I learned about ham radio a while back but didn't have the time till a few months ago I bought a book and within 2 weeks
I passed my tech and my general, but without my CW I can't get the coveted HF hands. A couple weeks ago, a great ham, WA5KRP, invited me over to his home to participate in the DX Worldwide competition I got to make my first true DX contacts, I talked ALL over the world that night and I will tell you now after that experience I am determined to learn CW so I can talk across the world on my own. The tests are all knowledge but CW is a skill, and skills are harder to learn than strait facts. But mastery of a skill should entitle the person to greater privileges. If you want to keep the code alive encourage people to get their tech then share HF with them and help them learn the code, if we don't look out for Ham radio and keep adding members the FCC will strip away our rights. Government by default grows larger and takes more power from the people, Don't let the take this from us because we here too busy bickering among ourselves, help each other and you will be helping yourselves in the process.

Where we are now is a great place, you can get into ham radio enough for the rest of the ham community to guide you thr uthe rest of your never ending amature radio education. where we stand now could use a few small tweaks but all in all it's a good place. Tell the ARRL what you think, tell the FCC what you think but if you wnat ot be heard don't say "I don't want those no code monkeys in MY space." Just because came into the hobby via a no code tech class doesn't mean I am a slacker or not interested in the learning aspect. Lets give those newbies a reason to WANT that CW and WANT those HF Privileges.

My appoligies for repeating myself, I feel that more important than the code/no code issue is the issue of attitude.

**begin soapbox**
Remember that on July 4, 1776, many people stood up to a goverment that was tryranical and took thier freedoms and told them we will not fade away into the night, we will have our freedoms. our goverment IS TAKING OUR FREEDOMS, so let us stand up and tell the goverment,WE THE PEOPLE ARE the goverment and [U]we will[U] have our rights. The FCC is there to protect ham radio, not to take it away. Regardless of what party line you follow, we all know that the goverment is to protect and serve the people not to rule over them. **end soapbox **

I welcome responses, Please send them to me via private message as i probly will not keep reading EVERY new post on this thread.Thx

n8ary

11-02-2003, 02:59 PM

I am sorry for turning this away from code-nocode, but:

THERE ARE WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE IN THIS HOBBY THAT TAKE IT WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. #

The ARES, RACES, Skywarn, Code/No Code, and other branches of the Amateur Radio service can sometimes take on an "exclusive" attitude and discourage good people from participating.

We are all volunteers when we sign up for some of these "Help-Out" groups, yet we still insist on making it look like some sort of paramilitary group to outsiders, complete with authentic Armed Forces insignia (usually officer only) and uniforms that look like combat colors instead of high visibility colors to be easily seen.

Certain groups of Others just want to keep everyone else out so they don't have to listen on a frequency before calling CQ.

I guess we can find this kind of organization all over where the insecure, overbearing people tend to be in charge (or pseudo-charge) and the ones who get along well with others fill in the rest of the spaces in the world.

Just join your local PTA if you want a good dose of it. Please don't bring that behavior along when you are "hobbying" with me.

G8RLD

11-02-2003, 04:02 PM

I'm pleased to see some constructive comments and agree with N8ARY that too many treat this hobby far too seriously. It is first and foremost a HOBBY with the ability to assist in times of need. Morse code is not an essential requirement for those times where we can render assistance. The knowledge of morse code does not make you a better operator. Increase the theory examinations if you want more professional operators, require a higher educational standard, my goodness it's needed!
When I passed my licence examination back in 1978, it wasn't multiple answer questions - you had to actually show that you understood the theory and how to carry out the calculations and draw circuit diagrams with some knowledge of what the components actually did, without being fed possible answers to the questions.
I'm fed up with hearing comments that it's the end of morse code - it has nothing whatsoever to do with reducing the use of morse code. It just isn't the chosen mode of communication for many and why should it be a requirement to access HF when the theory examination has already been passed. Maybe we should tighten the theory questions and require all to be re-tested when licences are due for renewal.
Robert
W4/G8RLD

WA9SVD

11-02-2003, 05:25 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G8RLD @ Nov. 02 2003,09:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm pleased to see some constructive comments and agree with N8ARY that too many treat this hobby far too seriously. It is first and foremost a HOBBY with the ability to assist in times of need. Morse code is not an essential requirement for those times where we can render assistance. The knowledge of morse code does not make you a better operator. Increase the theory examinations if you want more professional operators, require a higher educational standard, my goodness it's needed!
When I passed my licence examination back in 1978, it wasn't multiple answer questions - you had to actually show that you understood the theory and how to carry out the calculations and draw circuit diagrams with some knowledge of what the components actually did, without being fed possible answers to the questions.
I'm fed up with hearing comments that it's the end of morse code - it has nothing whatsoever to do with reducing the use of morse code. It just isn't the chosen mode of communication for many and why should it be a requirement to access HF when the theory examination has already been passed. Maybe we should tighten the theory questions and require all to be re-tested when licences are due for renewal.
Robert
W4/G8RLD
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
An intelligent, logical and reasonable approach.

The only aspect that is not practical is the re-testing. It would be an impossible burden on the examination system, and yes, also a burden on the license holder. It's up to each licensee to maintain and increase their knowledge of Amateur Radio (I won't say hobby, because it's that and should be more) but retesting would serve little purpose. "Memorize a bunch of answers" and then forget them all for another ten years? The people that want to advance their knowledge and the state of the "art" will keep up with advances in Amateur Radio Technology and Technique. Why re-test them? Those that don't keep up? Well, the "Old Timers" licensed 20, 30 or even 40 years ago that claim they are far better than the recent hams have never been retested either.

If the written exam (and/or the passing grade) is changed in exchange for the elimination of the code exam, then there is merit in the idea. More knowledge in the rules and proper operating procedures would go much further in the pursuit of better operators
.
Morse testing originated at a time when CW was the ONLY means of communication via "the Ether." Later (at least in the U.S.) it was advocated (by the ARRL, and implemented by the FCC) as a means of limiting the number of licensed operators. "To LIMIT the number of licensed operators, NOT to ensure GOOD operators."

Morse will NOT die out, whether the test requirement exists in some form or not.

Best regards to all. (73 is for CW, after all.)

VE3EN

11-02-2003, 05:30 PM

Hmm.. in 2000 i past my Basic Test and 12 w.p.m morse code test. Allowing me full access to every band, only thing i cant do.. is run more than 100 Watts output. If i pass my advanced test.. then i can run up to 1000 watts.

First they dropped the requirement down to 5 w.p.m to get full access. # Now they are thinkin about no code.

Does this mean that my Basic Liscense will automatically be pushed up to advanced ? #Seems Fair.

WA9SVD

11-02-2003, 05:52 PM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (VE3GIB @ Nov. 02 2003,10:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hmm.. in 2000 i past my Basic Test and 12 w.p.m morse code test. Allowing me full access to every band, only thing i cant do.. is run more than 100 Watts output. If i pass my advanced test.. then i can run up to 1000 watts.

First they dropped the requirement down to 5 w.p.m to get full access. # Now they are thinkin about no code.

Does this mean that my Basic Liscense will automatically be pushed up to advanced ? #Seems Fair.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
If they follow the procedure used here in the U.S., no, you won't be automatically upgraded to your Advanced Class, as there is still a difference in the written exam, is there not?

When the U.S. lowered the CW requirement to 5 W.P.M., nobody was automatically "upgraded."

There WAS a type of "Grandfather Clause," however.

Prior to 1978, Tech licensees in the U.S. had to take a 5 W.P.M. code exam, and the same written exam as the General Class. (I had to take mine in front of FCC examiners, not VE's back in 1966.) After 15 April 2000, those Tech license holders could upgrade to General without further examination, as they had credit for the same written element as the Generals, and they had passed the new code requirement. Nobody got anything "for free." Techs with code licensed after 1978 (there's a specific cutoff date, but that's not really important in this discussion) still had to take the General written exam to upgrade. No-code Techs still have to (at this time) pass the 5 W.P.M. code test as well as the General written exam to upgrade.

In your case, to be fair, you would/should still have to pass the written exam to upgrade. That way, those with your Advanced Class license should be at least on a similar technical level, regardless of having passed a Morse exam or not.
Granted, those that pased more difficult Morse requirements may feel some resentment. As unfortunate as that may be, I don't see any completely fair way to resolve the situation. Eventually, progress in Amateur Radio will eliminate Morse TESTING (not use) whether it's tomorrow or 20 years from now. Best regards.

VA2VA

11-02-2003, 08:34 PM

Hello KD5ZEW, I read your message with great interest and I agree that ham radio is at stake if cooperation between radio amateurs stays as it is right now. In Quebec City, for instance, there are no morse code courses or workshops available.

I believe morse code workshops are the best way to learn morse code, the teacher being ideally the examinor. Moreover, I think the examination could occur at any time during the workshop, without the teacher telling the student, this way the student would feel much less nervous. The teacher/examinor will know when a student is mastering the required tx and rx speed of 5 WPM.

Best 73 from VA2VA #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

G8RLD

11-02-2003, 08:50 PM

Thank you Larry WA9SVD, I appreciate your comments and I guess the comment regarding re-testing at licence renewal was a little "tongue in cheek" and I agree that it probably would not be a realistic requirement. However, the point is that it is technical skills that should merit access to HF and not the ability to send and receive morse code, any more than one should be computer literate or have a sound knowledge of SSTV or other digital modes before being allowed HF. All that is achieved with continuing with morse code as a requirement is to preclude otherwise valuable recruits, mostly young people from entering a hobby and assuring its future!
To be able to read and send morse and then never use it again is a complete waste - but to have a higher technical knowledge will be a long lasting benefit. I'm not in the radio or electrical business in any way as a career, I'm a chemist, but I took the trouble to learn the theory and continue to develop that knowledge after passing the test in '78.
Best regards,
Robert W4/G8RLD

n7wsb

11-03-2003, 12:35 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n8ary @ Nov. 02 2003,07:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am sorry for turning this away from code-nocode, but:

THERE ARE WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE IN THIS HOBBY THAT TAKE IT WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
This isn't nearly as bad as it used to be. I can remember the no-code debate 10-12 years ago online. I was particapating in a discussion on usenet (yes I really did have internet access that long ago) and having hams cry bloody murder at me that I was doing a disservice to all the operators in ww2 (and especially those who passed on) by even suggesting that the FCC relax the cw test. I haven't seen this claim lately http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif.

You pro-coders have actually relaxed your very own standards! I'm ashamed!

Ironically the test was far easier then than it is now.

KD5OSJ

11-03-2003, 03:10 AM

what if they drop sowhat i am glad i hope they do i never did like the code i donot think it going to be like cb some of the cbers cannot even spell ther name it going to happen someday the droping of the code it will bring more hams to this great hobby if you donot like it sell your radios or box them up.but i am all for it.

ve3sre

11-03-2003, 04:26 AM

Radio Amateurs of Canada (RAC) did a pretty extensive consultation with the Canadian ham community and the community sent two clear messages regardless of license class

1. The code requirement for HF access should be eliminated

2. There should be some tightening up of the "basic" license.

They've done both, set the criteria for switching from the current licensing system to the new system, and left the door open for future changes i.e. a "Foundation License" along the lines of what the RSGB has put in place for youth programmes, as well as looking at including new technologies in the amateur radio syllabus.

They've also opened the door for folks in the new "intermediate" class license to homebrew equipment for the microwave bands...something they're not allowed to do currently in Canada.

Code testing is still available for those who might need it for reciprocal operating privileges in countries that decide to keep the code requirement or for whatever other reason hams want the code certification.

In all, I think its quite a balanced approach to the "new world" of amateur radio. In this "new world" each country makes its own decision on the whole code issue. So whatever your views are, make them known to your national organization.

KC2KTZ

11-03-2003, 08:54 AM

Isn't this argument a bit old?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif? # We've got pages and pages and pages of comments on this code thing! #I agree with others- THE HORSE IS DEAD... GONE... 6 FOOT UNDER... STANDING AROUND WITH OTHER DEAD HORSES IN SOME PASTURE IN THE SKY....

Get it???

73,
KC2KTZ

KD5ZEW

11-03-2003, 10:55 AM

I imagine for as long as the fcc keeps changing (or don't change) things this argument is going to continue.

-john

edit: those poor horses are doomed to an eterniy of being beaten.

KD5WUD

11-03-2003, 12:58 PM

I have been watching this debate for months now.I am planning to upgrade to general.If it means I have to know code ,then I will do the best I can to learn it.While reading on this topic,I've noticed that some people think that they are mack daddy's because they know code.
Some of them but not all tend to cut down the no code hams.I guess some people have not accomplished much in life,and it is the little things that make some feel important.I will take more pride in being a good father and providing a good living for my family.The I know code T-shirt probably will never be a good seller.THough some may wear it to show people how smart they are....

aa1mn

11-03-2003, 01:45 PM

KD5WUD,

You're right on target.

Knowing code is the least of life's concerns. It DOESN'T make ANYONE a better perso, or a better ham, never has and never will.

Chuck, AA1MN

K3DAV

11-03-2003, 10:58 PM

BRAVO! BRAVO! Now let's give this poltergeist horse (I like to call him, Morse) the silver bullet, and clean house.

Bi**c, moan, complain, until hell freezes over. The CW requirement is gonna go bye bye, like it or not. Get over it and move on to far more important issues like BPL.

BPL is moving forward because too many people are more worried about CW requirements, and doing nothing about telling their Congressperson to stop BPL.

Actually!! I think the FCC should decide to keep the CW requirement right now.

#1. It would put an end to this age-old pathetic argument.
AND
#2. It will mean nothing when BPL distroys the HF band, because everybody was too busy whinning about code ~vs~ no code.
AND
#3. VHF and UHF will go to the dogs when BPL kills HF, and all of the whinners have to use VHF/UHF to remain hams. That's when the peacefull and smoothly run VHF/UHF bands will turn to chaos. Too bad we don't have a test to keep out whinners. It's obvious that learning CW doesn't do it.

Now let's allow Morse to RIP.

K0ZZE

11-03-2003, 11:57 PM

good god man!!! my sides are hurting from all the laughing your post just created. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif your right though thats where theyll end up on VHF/UHF. but it would suck to have the hf bands wiped out of history by a trashy sounding noise! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

KM2I

11-04-2003, 12:17 AM

Morse code testing is not mandatory. It is voluntarily taken by those who expect to earn broader privileges by expanding expertise in communications art.

KC8URV

11-04-2003, 12:20 AM

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif #OK ENOUGH I SPENT YEARS AS A SEARCH AND RESCUE CORIDNATOR. I HAVE OPERATED EVERYTHING FROM TELETYPE TO THE LATEST GPS AND RADAR SYSTEMS. I GOT MY HAM LIENCE TO EXPLORE NEW THINGS AND MEET NEW PEOPLE. THERE ARE SO MANY MODES OF COMMINUCATION THAT WE CAN'T POSSIBLY KNOW THEM ALL. AS YOU CAN GUESS I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON MORSE FOR SOME TIME AND AS YET HAVE NOT GOT IT!!!! YES I AM A LAZY NEBUIE I THINK WE SHOULD GET RID OF THE RAIDOS THAT TUNE FOR YOU AND THE COMPUTERS THAT CONVERT EVERYTHING FOR YOU LETS GET RID OF TRANISTORS AND KEEP ALL TUBE STUFF (I DO LIKE TUBE STUFF) HOW MANY PEOPLE KNOW ALL THERE IS TO KNOW ABOUT PSK OR PACKET OR SOAR I HAVE MET ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE WHO CAN HERE THE TONE CHANGES IN MORSE BUT AFTER MANY YEARS IN A ENGINE ROOM A LOT OF THE TIME WITH TURBINES I CAN'T.IF I WANT TO RUN MORSE I CAN USE A READER AND SENDER WITH MY KEY BOARD I COULD EVEN DO IT WITH VOICE RECIGONIZITON YES I KNOW HOW TO BUILD IT AND USE IT SO WHY SHOULD I BE PUT DOWN AND DEFAMED BY THE VERY PEOPLE I CHOSE TO JOIN DUE TO LACK OF CODE. IS THERE NOT ENOUGH ROOM FOR ALL OF US ON HF IF NOT MABEY WE CAN GET THE FCC TO GIVE US SOME MORE INSTEAD OF TAKING IT AWAY FOR LACK OF USE. COMON GUYS LETS NETWORK OUR COMPUTERS AND HOOK UP OUR RAIDOS AND SEE IF WE CAN MOVE FOWARD I WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON MORSE BUT IF I DON'T GET IT I STILL HAVE A CONTRUBITION I CAN MAKE.
# # # # # # # # # # # MK1 DONALD E. PEASE USCG RET
# # # # # # # # # # # PS. I HAVE WORKED OVER 5000 SEARCH AND RESCUE CASES AND HALF OF THEM AS SAR CORIDNATOR

11-04-2003, 12:48 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KM2I @ Nov. 03 2003,17:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Morse code testing is not mandatory. #It is voluntarily taken by those who expect to earn broader privileges by expanding expertise in communications art.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Precisely! Best post on this thread! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

K0ZZE

11-04-2003, 02:40 AM

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ke4umd @ Nov. 03 2003,19:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KM2I @ Nov. 03 2003,17:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Morse code testing is not mandatory. #It is voluntarily taken by those who expect to earn broader privileges by expanding expertise in communications art.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Precisely! Best post on this thread! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
well i wasn't going to do this but what the hay. do you mean an expertise of learning and forgeting cause thats what most of them do, they learn it and forget it.most people just pass the code test just to use phone on the hf bands. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif argue if you must, its almost a proven fact.look at all the posts on here in the past few months,some of them from generals to extra's saying to drop the code. most of the hams out this way just use phone. so another words its just another expertise we voluntarily learn and voluntarily forget. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif any way as i have posted before already have it down to a t. but