View Full Version : COMMENT POSTINGS RAMP UP AS FILING DEADLINE NEARS
AA7BQ
10-29-2005, 04:34 PM
With three days to go, nearly 3200 comments had been filed--more than 500 of
them in the past week--in response to the FCC "Morse code" Notice of
Proposed Rule Making and Order (NPRM&O) in WT Docket 05-235. The NPRM&O
proposes to do away with the 5 WPM Morse code requirement for all license
classes. The July NPRM&O also denied several proposals to create a new
entry-level license class.
The closing date for comments is Monday, October 31. Reply comments--ie,
comments on comments filed by October 31--are due Monday, November 14.
To file on-line comments on the FCC NPRM&O in WT Docket 05-235 or to view
others' comments in the proceeding, visit the FCC Electronic Comment Filing
System (ECFS) <http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/>. After clicking on "Submit a
Filing" or "Search for Filed Comments," enter "05-235" (without the
quotation marks but including the hyphen) in the "Proceeding" field. The FCC
will accept brief comments in a comment window or more lengthy filings as
attachments.
Alternative filing formats are available for people with disabilities.
Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc) by e-mail <FCC504@fcc.gov>
or telephone 202-418?0530 or TTY 202-418?0432.
For additional information, contact William T. Cross, Public Safety and
Critical Infrastructure Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau,
<William.Cross@fcc.gov>; 202-418?0680; TTY 202-418?7233.
An FCC Report and Order ending this proceeding and announcing the effective
date of any rule changes is not likely until sometime in 2006.
Material from The ARRL Letter may be republished or reproduced in whole or
in part in any form without additional permission. Credit must be given to
The ARRL Letter and The American Radio Relay League.
kc7jty
10-29-2005, 05:04 PM
"The times they are a changin".
kk6fr
10-29-2005, 05:45 PM
Change is the reason for time. And it's about time for a change.
I am very happy to see the requirement of code to obtain a license removed.
kc7jty
10-29-2005, 05:48 PM
Quote[/b] (kk6fr @ Oct. 28 2005,11:45)]Change is the reason for time. # And it's about time for a change.
I am very happy to see the requirement of code to obtain a license removed.
I think you are being just a bit premature. A word with W5ALT perhaps?
BTW: I like that signature line. I've felt the same for as long as I can remember.
AD7BK
10-29-2005, 05:52 PM
(This is my opinion and you may not agree with it)
Since when does the FCC listen to what we have to say, they certianally didn't with BPL. The FCC can do whatever they want. They want to sell us out to big companies that offer them millions of dollars revenue for our bands to impliment what is the most polluting of all, now they want to elminate code, well that is fine they can do that just make the general test 50 questions or make the extra test 75 questions. No matter how you look at it, this is one step away from making us all leave which some can theroize is the reason they are dropping code completly. They did not have to do that they could of left it on the extra requirement, since all they had to do was elminate it for HF access they didnt say HOW MUCH ACCESS.
Everyone fears that this will make Amateur radio into a over-glorified CB, well after what I hear on 75m and sometimes on 20m and now 40m it is almost like a cb.... What is gonna end up happeing is one of 2 things, either it will boom ham radio and make it good, OR it will be close to de-regulation so that BPL can be on our bands rather we like it or not.
I did 5wpm I am a extra-lite but that doesn't mean I don't act like a extra class. I do use code and I am slowly getting my speed up. Doom-sayers say "Eliminate code and you will turn ham radio into a CB" Those who said CODE stands in thier way says: "Great now I can have HF access and talk around the world" What do we do? What will happen? Will it be good or bad for ham radio?
The anwser is simple: "Wait and see. What happens, happens."
If it gets too bad I will just change frequencies or go to cw. We will retain our CW sub-bands. Times chaged I talked to a few older hams who had to do alot more than most of you to get thier licenes. Example draw up a circuit that will work, send as well as recieve code, 18wpm, and do elements 1-4 and 4 code tests 5 wpm - 18 wpm. It is so easy to get a license now than it was 30 years ago. This is the law of the world things change.
Either you deal with it or you don't the choice is up to you. I for one will deal with it. I will live with it. If you want to keep the bands free from BPL use your license talk on the air have fun do code do psk31 do rtty do pactor do packet do get on the emergency nets do get on regular nets do talk do listen DO HAVE FUN, what ever you do don't leave, that is what BPL providers want to pollute the band so they can make thier millions of dollars in profits.
73
AD7BK
PS:If you want to complain to me about this post take it to private message.
The FCC will do what the FCC wants to do. I feel that they want to do away with the CW requirement.......A sad day will soon be approaching amateur radio.
Tom kcØw
W5WEC
10-29-2005, 06:00 PM
After 5000 comments, here we go again.
Amateur radio is not high on the FCC list and they are going to do what they want to do, no matter what we say or think.Just give it a rest and "wait and see"
n7spy
10-29-2005, 06:34 PM
It's not the dropping of the CW requirement that bothers me...
... it's the potential for the CW bands to dissapear and/or get crowded with people who can't/won't read the Band Plans :rock:
/taking the CW test anyway
//because I can http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
n3jbh
10-29-2005, 06:54 PM
where all doomed, doomed i tell you. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
KC9ECI
10-29-2005, 07:06 PM
5000 comments by 500 people.
K8TEK
10-29-2005, 07:49 PM
Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Oct. 29 2005,15:06)]5000 comments by 500 people.
LOL
KB2SEO
10-29-2005, 10:16 PM
I believe the loss of CW is a affront to those who DID pass, whether it was 5 or 50 WPM- It IS what keeps a lot of people who I would rather not see on the bands off them. I have heard the comments from the "Freebanders" for instance saying stuff like "Hey! I can now work from 26.0 to.....then I can do it and be legal.
Scary thought!
I guess the real question is, If the Code is a "filter" of sorts, and it's removed, is it a safe deduction that the sense of pride of EARNING the ticket is gone? Perhaps with the lack of that feeling, Some will be a flash in the Pan? many of these people will join and simply fall off again, seeing that we are NOT going to tolerate the "CB itis."
Many feared the VHf would be a mess. But I gotta say that other than a few new comers from the trucking world (forgetting which Mike he's on- I have seen this a lot by me, It is NOT a slight to the truckers!), and Cb'rs trying to move on (I was one of them) I don't see much problems on the VHF bands in my area. Maybe we'll get lucky? And don't forget this guys- Many of these guys we are worried about want acceptance into the fold. I think the majority will behave themselves, lest they wind up labled LID and shunned. On the Plus side, the Local Clubs MAY get some energetic folks out of this!.
ab8ma
10-29-2005, 10:26 PM
Quote[/b] (K8TEK @ Oct. 29 2005,19:49)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Oct. 29 2005,15:06)]5000 comments by 500 people.
LOL
Ya. I thought he was refering to that other thread. Well over 5000 posts I think. But I would venture far fewer than 500 contributers.
ad4mg
10-29-2005, 10:52 PM
Quote[/b] (ab8ma @ Oct. 29 2005,18:26)]Quote[/b] (K8TEK @ Oct. 29 2005,19:49)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Oct. 29 2005,15:06)]5000 comments by 500 people.
LOL
Ya. I thought he was refering to that other thread. Well over 5000 posts I think. But I would venture far fewer than 500 contributers.
Exactly 631 different contributors.
You can click the number of posts, and a little window pops up to tell you who posted and how many posts they made. #Start at the top, copy all the way to the last entry, paste it into a spreadsheet, and there ya go!
The top 10 posters:
call # # # ## posts
------ # # #-------
kb0uzr # #234
ab0wr # # 194
K4JF # # # 192
W5MJL # #185
N1IRL # # 167
KC0NBW 148
K7JEM # # 145
K1MH # # #131
n2nh # # # 121
kg4zar
10-30-2005, 12:53 AM
As a trucker,a former CB'er,a no code tech, a Search & Rescue volunteer and an avid 2m/6m SSB'er, I agree with KB2SEOs comments. I don't hear anything that sounds like CB on either 2m or 6m here in Ky.
What does concern me is the possibilty of loosing CW bandwidth anywhere in the spectrum for those that choose to use CW,even though it does not interest me at this time.
And most of all, as AD7BK states..."do". Do use the frequencies you are ticketed for,do get involved in emergency nets and just plain do have fun.
I WONDER IF THE F.C.C.EVER ASKED FOR RILEY HOLLINGSWORTH INPUT ON THE DRASTICT CHANGES TAKING PLACE IN AMATEUR RADIO?AND WHAT WOULD HIS FEELINGS BE.WHAT WOULD THE COMMISION HAVE DONE IF NO ONE WOULD HAVE VOLUNTEERD TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
V.E.C.PROGRAM.?EVERY THING THE GOVT.REGULATES SOONER OR LATER TURNS INTO A CHAOTIC MESS,LIKE MICHAEL POWELL WHO WHO HANDED THE (B.P.L.)TO THE UTILITY COMPANYS THEN RETIRED.WHAT A DISGRACE THAT WAS.THIS HOBBY,S DEMISE STARTED WAY BACK IN THE SIXTIES WITH INCENTIVE LICENSING,THIS IS JUST ANOTHER STEP TOWARDS THE EVENTUALL ELIMINATION OF AMATEUR RADIO.NO CODE NO PRIDE ,TOO MANY WANT TO WEAR THE UNIFORM, STAND TALL, BUT DONT WANT TO GO THROUGH BASIC TRAINING.I ONLY HOPE THE F.C.C.IS HONEST WHEN THEY SAY THE WILL NOT TOUCH THE (C.W.)SUB BANDS,AND THANK GOD THEY CANNOT TOUCH 30 MTRS.I GUESS THE A.C.L.U. WOULD NOT BE INTERESTED IN OUR CAUSE TO KEEP THE STATUS QUO.HI,HI.DONT GET MAD STAY HAPPY.LOU
KC0SZK
10-30-2005, 02:25 AM
i don,t think it will be as bad as evryone has been implying as a trucker of over 28 years and a new ham i would like to say this im a tech temp ag and i am studying for code . and im in the hobby to get away from the cber,s and have fun. but at the same time i came into ham to learn!!! i live in a part of the country that need,s more weather spotter,s more first responder,s more hams in general to do comunication,s in times of emergency and i think that most of you would agree .not to just have fun if dropping the code will get more people on board for reasons like this i am all for it .and the more people to keep our bands active the better for us:rock:
Hello Sirs,
What was Fred thinking? He’s started another Nprm thread!! lol http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
73s de Samantha 2e1dau
Edit:
CW the Be All and END All of Amateur Radio?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
VE7NOT
10-30-2005, 03:05 AM
I an trying to learn the code myself but putting that aside the USA has a problem... canada allows no code on hf... since radio knows no borders we develop a problem now...
The other thing is the average dumb-looking computer tech cellphone to ear kids couldn't care less about ham radio.
The reason is there are no challenges..HF is pretty much explored... not saying there are no new surprises there but not many... vhf is a little new but not that much... uhf and ghz are new however most kids have no patience for the odd tropo etc.
THz might be intersting using laser pointers on AM which is being done however alot of THz is explored with a normal 100w light bulb http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
I suggest a new band>>>>
the 300Khz right down to nothing
These are some weird bands... mind control around 18hz from what i read... and even using this planet as an antenna. Also there is a thread about gravity waves which are being researched.
I'm 27 love HF/ VHF and am thinking of Lf or ELF. i have no use for the cellphone crap like nodes- bbs- or enhanced ssb, however what will appeal to a teen is vlf...>> contact arrl http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Quote[/b] (VE7NOT @ Oct. 30 2005,04:05)]I am trying to learn the code myself but putting that aside the USA has a problem... canada allows no code on hf... since radio knows no borders we develop a problem now...
Hello Sir,
Explain more?
28 Countries have a No Morse Code TEST but Still use CW
But I guess its Hard for some people to figure that by not having a Test Does NOT mean the End of people Using the Mode or Learning it (like me)?
How many people learnt CW just to pass the TEST to get on HF and then NEVER Used CW??
But this has All been Beaten to Death in the Nprm Thread!!
73s de Samantha 2e1dau
Amazing. I had no idea I was that prolific on posts. I guess being right in the middle, I caught flak from both sides!! (But far more from the no-coders than the traditionalists!)
But all that is moot. I filed my comments with the FCC. Those are the only ones that mean anything.
kg4kww
10-30-2005, 03:43 AM
kk6fr - I agree with you 100%, I have already filed my comments. Bye Bye Code, Hello HF Phone.
Quote[/b] (kg4kww @ Oct. 29 2005,20:43)]kk6fr - I agree with you 100%, I have already filed my comments. Bye Bye Code, Hello HF Phone.
And there are many people that have said on this forum that comments like the above have never been made......
kc8afh
10-30-2005, 04:28 AM
Joking around with this, but I can't wait to hear it on the air!
10-4 good buddy. I think I'll have that for my Repeaters roger beep (AKA courtesy tone), and have the RSSI level read back as "you're blown my socks off come on"
73 KC8AFH http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
www.hamjones.com
I love it we have to fine the UP side to all of this mess. will there be a day that we can walk into a W#$-Mart and buy a HF radio or HT's?
ON6KE
10-30-2005, 07:28 AM
Gentlemen, Madams,
Please forget the requirement, it's a lost case, stop mourning. Those that hate the code we'll never encounter on the CW sub-bands while those that love it will forever be there rattling the keys.
Let your fingers talk,
73
VE7NOT
10-30-2005, 07:55 AM
this is all silly actually when i started stufying for my license in 96 I was aware of packet radio.. I shrugged it off since computer and ham radio were different...
Once i passed the test I got an htx242 which is sitting beside me now with my new astatic mic http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif on it
If I had $$ I would like a ssb cw rig but since all I use is a whip on the balcony there is little point and i try for simplex fm mostly although little is there
The real issue here though is not voice vs code but ham radio vs computer nerd that claim to be hams<<<<,
Yes computers... I dread them.. yes I hate even this one... the think is the internet is my main reason for it... i can research my favorite hobbies including ham and cb radio online http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
This is all useful but as i try to learn code to operate someday on cw people use bbs and echolink... hope sad... a father goes and brags to his wife he just talked to a guy in england on his computer... his wife trying to be supportave gives him a horray while his son goes by saying: I just talked to a cute chick in england on chat, with a webcam
Sad? Yes... lets fire up our mikes and keys and make ham radio happen http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
ae4fa
10-30-2005, 10:49 AM
Can it be that ARRL did not file a comment? I couldn't find one.
w4dlh
10-30-2005, 01:31 PM
Quote[/b] (n7spy @ Oct. 29 2005,11:34)]It's not the dropping of the CW requirement that bothers me...
... it's the potential for the CW bands to dissapear and/or get crowded with people who can't/won't read the Band Plans :rock:
/taking the CW test anyway
//because I can http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Maybe we should add modes to testing then the bands will increase since you think no testing equals decrease in band use.
With the cost of an HF rig today I don't think anyone will be running down to Sears to get a rig to goof around on with your buddies.
KI4LIF
10-30-2005, 02:34 PM
I,m new to Amateur Radio. i've had my license just a short while. i really enjoy the friendship between all the hams out there. i hope FCC keeps the morse code as a requirement. i am working on my code now . i have a hearing prcblem dew to i have meniere's disease. but heres hopeing they keep the code around. thanks KI4LIF Gene
KE5GGY
10-30-2005, 04:09 PM
I'm a new ham but I've worked in commercial broadcasting (currently GM of stations in Dallas, Texas) for over 30 years. #
After seeing difficulties that radio stations had with basic communications after Katrina, I was motivated to get my ticket. #And, since I'm encouraging a number of co-workers to get their licenses, seeing the code requirement potentially disappear will help get these key people 'up and running' much faster. #Consequently, in an emergency, my stations will be able to provide better service to our community of license. #
Personally, I'm going to learn code and take my General test before any changes are made. #I want to work DX and am interested in teaching code to my son. #However, to get more first-responders into the hobby, removing the code is a positive move. #
Thanks,
Pete Thomson
KE5GGY
GM KWRD/KSKY Radio --- #Dallas, Texas
Quote[/b] (kg4gtq @ Oct. 30 2005,06:31)][quote=n7spy,Oct. 29 2005,11:34]It's not the dropping of the CW requirement that bothers me...
With the cost of an HF rig today I don't think anyone will be running down to Sears to get a rig to goof around on with your buddies.
You're kidding, of course. HF rigs have never been cheaper than they are today.
W9TZU
10-30-2005, 07:12 PM
The Sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!! Ham Radio will dry up and blow away without CW being part of the testing.
OH GROW UP!!
We heard the same nonsense when No-Code Techs came in and the service is just fine. In fact the fault of no growth lies within our own. When was the last time you heard a new call and didn't go back to them??? Too Busy?? Maybe having your nose out of joint because that new call is a no-code. If someone on your band or freq is new and just not doing it right,take the time to "meet" the person and give them some correction where needed. Who knows what will happen next.
"73's" Bob W9TZU
Quote[/b] (W9TZU @ Oct. 30 2005,12:12)]The Sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!! Ham Radio will dry up and blow away without CW being part of the testing.
OH GROW UP!!
We heard the same nonsense when No-Code Techs came in and the service is just fine. In fact the fault of no growth lies within our own. When was the last time you heard a new call and didn't go back to them??? Too Busy?? Maybe having your nose out of joint because that new call is a no-code. If someone on your band or freq is new and just not doing it right,take the time to "meet" the person and give them some correction where needed. Who knows what will happen next.
"73's" Bob W9TZU
I agree that CW should not necessarily be required for General, but how on earth can you claim to be ab Extra, top of the heap, when you don't even know the basics? Extra written should be tougher and should have CW at 15wpm. Make it worth the effort. Especially when the main gain for Extra is more CW frequencies.
As for newcomers, I love to chat with newcomers. Always have.
What I have a problem with is those that say all modes should be allowed all over (and I'm against ARRL on that one as it would basically destroy CW) and especially those loudly proclaiming that CW should not be on the air at all. CW occupies a tiny portion of the bands now. Leave it alone!! It IS useful. It is even fun, of you will get off your duffs and try it!!
Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Oct. 29 2005,15:06)]5000 comments by 500 people.
Now, Now..... lets' not exaggerate. It's 3199 comments filed by 500 people.
Get it straight! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
And while I'm on the subject........
3,199 comments filed.... 660,000+ licensed hams.
Any more questions? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
kc8ykl
10-30-2005, 09:49 PM
Quote[/b] (W9TZU @ Oct. 30 2005,12:12)]The Sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!! Ham Radio will dry up and blow away without CW being part of the testing.
OH GROW UP!!
We heard the same nonsense when No-Code Techs came in and the service is just fine. In fact the fault of no growth lies within our own. When was the last time you heard a new call and didn't go back to them??? Too Busy?? Maybe having your nose out of joint because that new call is a no-code. If someone on your band or freq is new and just not doing it right,take the time to "meet" the person and give them some correction where needed. Who knows what will happen next.
"73's" Bob W9TZU
Well said Bob, AMEN!!
kc8ycz
10-31-2005, 12:22 AM
In my opinion.
I think they should drop the code for General, leave the extra class alone. Dont get me wrong I would love to see the code dropped for all classes but you know you have to earn that license. To make everyone happy drop the code for Genral and leave it for Extra. Split the difference.The Missing Lynk System (http://www.missinglynk.us)
Quote[/b] ]The Sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!! Ham Radio will dry up and blow away without CW being part of the testing.
OH GROW UP!!
We heard the same nonsense when No-Code Techs came in and the service is just fine. In fact the fault of no growth lies within our own. When was the last time you heard a new call and didn't go back to them??? Too Busy?? Maybe having your nose out of joint because that new call is a no-code. If someone on your band or freq is new and just not doing it right,take the time to "meet" the person and give them some correction where needed. Who knows what will happen next.
"73's" Bob W9TZU
I agree with Bob. Some of the General or Extra class operators in my area were more than happy to help me get it "right. Thanks Bob makes me feel even more welcomed to the Radio world. By the way I am a Tech.
N3TTN
10-31-2005, 12:53 AM
Quote[/b] ]I filed my comments with the FCC. Those are the only ones that mean anything.
Don't flatter yourself, the ONLY reason the commission takes comments at all is because they are REQUIRED TO BY LAW, otherwise they could care less what a group of hobbyists thinks or wants. You can "comment" till you are blue in the face, but don't delude yourself into believing it has any effect on the NPRM, the decision has already been made, it's a done deal, and anyone who thinks otherwise is just fooling themselves. Life goes on, and so will amateur radio.
wa4gch
10-31-2005, 01:05 AM
Yep droping the code will kill the hobby SO why dont we just require a 100 wpm code test ...........
Right ............
Bruce WA4GCH
SMIRK# 70
member OOTC
Life Member ARRL
Might even join QCWA ........
Quote[/b] (N3TTN @ Oct. 30 2005,17:53)]Quote[/b] ]I filed my comments with the FCC. #Those are the only ones that mean anything.
Don't flatter yourself, the ONLY reason the commission takes comments at all is because they are REQUIRED TO BY LAW, otherwise they could care less what a group of hobbyists thinks or wants. You can "comment" till you are blue in the face, but don't delude yourself into believing it has any effect on the NPRM, the decision has already been made, it's a done deal, and anyone who thinks otherwise is just fooling themselves. Life goes on, and so will amateur radio.
You're saying the FCC violates the law. I don't think I will say that. But face it, comments on here mean less than comments to the FCC, however you feel the FCC handles it.
But I have seen the FCC and other agencies change as a result of comments from citizens. So I'm not quite as cynical. Also we are not, by law, just "a group of hobbyists".
My two cents: I'm oppsed to no code licensing. I've only heard 3 main arguments against code. 1) There's the "I can't learn it so we should drop it gang". I guess if we have kids that can't learn math we should drop that also. Maybe we have! (Actually I think today a majority of high school students couldn't even find Washington DC on a map.) 2) Then there's the "its too antiquted argument". Its amazing to me to look at recent multimode DXpeditions and see more CW QSO's than SSB. Could it be CW works in bad conditions? In truth CW works better with less bandwidth and less power. Did I once read something about using the minimum amount of power to make a contact? 3) And finally the "other countries have dropped it so we should too" argument. Similar to Johnny jumped off a bridge so we should too. Actually not all countries have dropped it and several have made the decision to retain code.
Cost is more of a barrier to getting more people involved than learning code. (Actually there are a few other societal barriers also but I won't get into that.) Its hard to imagine little Johnny or Mary asking daddy for 3 grand so they can start their new hobby. You can get on HF with a CW rig and wire antenna for well under $100. But we don't teach that.
In any case, the right answer is:
1) A general license - with all HF phone privileges
2) A general + code license (call it an Extra) with all HF phone and all HF code privileges.
3) A novice license with limited HF phone privileges.
Extras will complain that this further dumbs down the license structure - but too late - we've already done that.
Well that's probably more than 2 cents worth. All the best to everyone -
Larry - NU4B
i think you will get out of this hobbie what you will put into it but with the cw i think the reason was to make you learn something new. i work lots of cw .sorry for you guys who are afraid to learn something new http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
I am hoping the fcc keeps the cw and wish they would have left it at 5-13-20 "No Clickie " No Tickie" cw forever NN6T
ae4fa
10-31-2005, 11:03 AM
Quote[/b] ]Don't flatter yourself, the ONLY reason the commission takes comments at all is because they are REQUIRED TO BY LAW, otherwise they could care less what a group of hobbyists thinks or wants. You can "comment" till you are blue in the face, but don't delude yourself into believing it has any effect on the NPRM, the decision has already been made, it's a done deal
I suppose that's why NPRM 04-140 (Novice Refarming), issued in February of 2004 has still not resulted in a Report and Order. Lots of comments on that one, too. Looks like the FCC is having second thoughts.
kd4mxe
10-31-2005, 12:37 PM
Quote[/b] (K9WJ @ Oct. 30 2005,19:53)]i think you will get out of this hobbie what you will put into it but with the cw i think the reason was to make you learn something new. i work lots of cw .sorry for you guys who are afraid to learn something new http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
k9wj- sir I am learning your code ,not Because I want to But to get on hf , and I am For getting Rid of the code as a Requirment 100% http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif 73 Bill
kd4mxe
10-31-2005, 12:45 PM
Quote[/b] (NU4B @ Oct. 30 2005,19:18)]My two cents: I'm oppsed to no code licensing. I've only heard 3 main arguments against code. 1) There's the "I can't learn it so we should drop it gang". I guess if we have kids that can't learn math we should drop that also. Maybe we have! (Actually I think today a majority of high school students couldn't even find Washington DC on a map.) 2) Then there's the "its too antiquted argument". Its amazing to me to look at recent multimode DXpeditions and see more CW QSO's than SSB. Could it be CW works in bad conditions? In truth CW works better with less bandwidth and less power. Did I once read something about using the minimum amount of power to make a contact? 3) And finally the "other countries have dropped it so we should too" argument. Similar to Johnny jumped off a bridge so we should too. Actually not all countries have dropped it and several have made the decision to retain code.
# Cost is more of a barrier to getting more people involved than learning code. (Actually there are a few other societal barriers also but I won't get into that.) Its hard to imagine little Johnny or Mary asking daddy for 3 grand so they can start their new hobby. You can get on HF with a CW rig and wire antenna for well under $100. But we don't teach that.
# In any case, the right answer is:
# 1) #A general license - with all HF phone privileges
# 2) A general + code license (call it an Extra) with all HF phone and all HF code privileges.
# 3) A novice license with limited HF phone privileges.
# Extras will complain that this further dumbs down the license structure - but too late #- we've already done that.
# Well that's probably more than 2 cents worth. All the best to everyone -
# # # # # #Larry - NU4B
nu4B - sir you said two cents worth, man you got at least 4 cents worth , you do Know the differnce dont you , 73 Bill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
kd4mxe
10-31-2005, 12:52 PM
Quote[/b] (n3jja @ Oct. 30 2005,14:18)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Oct. 29 2005,15:06)]5000 comments by 500 people.
Now, Now..... lets' not exaggerate. It's 3199 comments filed by 500 people.
Get it straight! #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
n3jja-sir this Horse should Be dead By now poor horse73 Bill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 29 2005,18:52)]Quote[/b] (ab8ma @ Oct. 29 2005,18:26)]Quote[/b] (K8TEK @ Oct. 29 2005,19:49)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Oct. 29 2005,15:06)]5000 comments by 500 people.
LOL
Ya. I thought he was refering to that other thread. Well over 5000 posts I think. But I would venture far fewer than 500 contributers.
Exactly 631 different contributors.
You can click the number of posts, and a little window pops up to tell you who posted and how many posts they made. Start at the top, copy all the way to the last entry, paste it into a spreadsheet, and there ya go!
The top 10 posters:
call # posts
------ -------
kb0uzr 234
ab0wr 194
K4JF 192
W5MJL 185
N1IRL 167
KC0NBW 148
K7JEM 145
K1MH 131
n2nh 121
Wow, I'm at the bottom of that list? Shazam!
kd4mxe
10-31-2005, 12:57 PM
Quote[/b] (kc8ykl @ Oct. 30 2005,14:49)]Quote[/b] (W9TZU @ Oct. 30 2005,12:12)]The Sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!! Ham Radio will dry up and blow away without CW being part of the testing.
OH GROW UP!!
We heard the same nonsense when No-Code Techs came in and the service is just fine. In fact the fault of no growth lies within our own. When was the last time you heard a new call and didn't go back to them??? Too Busy?? Maybe having your nose out of joint because that new call is a no-code. If someone on your band or freq is new and just not doing it right,take the time to "meet" the person and give them some correction where needed. Who knows what will happen next.
"73's" Bob W9TZU
Well said Bob, AMEN!!
w9tzu- well said keep up the good work , 73 Bill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
kd4mxe
10-31-2005, 01:20 PM
Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 30 2005,12:33)]Quote[/b] (W9TZU @ Oct. 30 2005,12:12)]The Sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!! Ham Radio will dry up and blow away without CW being part of the testing.
OH GROW UP!!
We heard the same nonsense when No-Code Techs came in and the service is just fine. In fact the fault of no growth lies within our own. When was the last time you heard a new call and didn't go back to them??? Too Busy?? Maybe having your nose out of joint because that new call is a no-code. If someone on your band or freq is new and just not doing it right,take the time to "meet" the person and give them some correction where needed. Who knows what will happen next.
"73's" Bob W9TZU
I agree that CW should not necessarily be required for General, but how on earth can you claim to be ab Extra, top of the heap, when you don't even know the basics? #Extra written should be tougher and should have CW at 15wpm. #Make it worth the effort. #Especially when the main gain for Extra is more CW frequencies.
As for newcomers, I love to chat with newcomers. #Always have.
What I have a problem with is those that say all modes should be allowed all over (and I'm against ARRL on that one as it would basically destroy CW) and especially those loudly proclaiming that CW should not be on the air at all. #CW occupies a tiny portion of the bands now. #Leave it alone!! #It IS useful. #It is even fun, of you will get off your duffs and try it!!
k4jf- sir why dont some of you die Hards take 10 min every day and get on hf and send some code to help some one ,you want to keep it But you dont wont to help any one ,thats the way you people work,73 Bill
Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Oct. 31 2005,06:20)]k4jf- sir why dont some of you die Hards take 10 min every day and get on hf and send some code #to help some one ,you want to keep it But you dont wont to help any one ,thats the way you people work,73 Bill
Bill, the CW portion is full most days. There are lots of folk out there. I can't get on as much as I would like due to wrist problems (as in medical). But, as stated, I DO enjoy getting on there and working newcomers, and do so on a regular basis.
Did you read anything in my statements that indicate I am never on CW? Didn't think so.
N3TTN
10-31-2005, 03:52 PM
Quote[/b] ]You're saying the FCC violates the law. I don't think I will say that. But face it, comments on here mean less than comments to the FCC, however you feel the FCC handles it.
But I have seen the FCC and other agencies change as a result of comments from citizens. So I'm not quite as cynical. Also we are not, by law, just "a group of hobbyists".
No, I am NOT saying that they violate the law, where did you come up with that?? I am saying that the FCC takes comments ONLY because it is part of the process they MUST adhere to UNDER THE LAW, do you understand that concept now?? If the comment period was NOT PART of that process do think they would just pop up and say "By the way guys, do you have any comments before we make this happen??" No... of course not.... you know it, I know it, and every ham knows it. With regard to the notion that citizen input influences changes at the FCC or other agencies, I believe that instances of it are exceedingly rare to say the least, and this current NPRM will not be one of those instances, you can bank on it. As for the "hobbyist" bit, we may not be "officialy" described by the FCC as hobbyists, but like it or not THAT IS basically the way the amateur service is viewed by the FCC. Face it, by comparison to other services we are just not a money making proposition for them, and they would like nothing better than to allocate some (or all) of "our" radio spectrum to commercial interests. The amateur service is pretty much the lowest priority for the FCC, and that situation is not likely to change anytime soon. Furthermore, the infighting that goes on among the ham community, especially with regard to the issue of CW and it's future, does nothing to improve our image in the eyes of the bureaucrats at the commission. You can call my attitude cynical if you like, but I prefer to call it realistic, because BPL, spectrum loss, and antenna restrictions are a few of the more pressing issues facing us at the moment, and the whole CW thing is one of the least urgent issues I can think of right now.
W0UZR
10-31-2005, 05:10 PM
WHAAAAT !!!
I thought we already have a
Code/NoCode
Thread
If there is no convincing anyone in that other thread, then what the h, is the use of trying again here?
n5wdz
10-31-2005, 05:12 PM
I have attempted the code test twice and possibly 3 times but cant remember. We even tried to get others to help us all out by sending us code on the air. No takers and none interested in doing so.
So, what do you do? Just keep at it and keep trying until code is eliminated as a requirement. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif I have taken the written test for upgrading to General before attempting the code test. In the meantime, hoped to get some on air help with code, but gotten NONE so far.
k9ekg
10-31-2005, 05:49 PM
Quote[/b] (n5wdz @ Oct. 31 2005,10:12)]I have attempted the code test twice and possibly 3 times but cant remember. We even tried to get others to help us all out by sending us code on the air. No takers and none interested in doing so.
So, what do you do? Just keep at it and keep trying until code is eliminated as a requirement. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif I have taken the written test for upgrading to General before attempting the code test. In the meantime, hoped to get some on air help with code, but gotten NONE so far.
Keep trying at it, if that is what you want to do. Don't let lack of help from someone else discourage you, keep working at it. You will get it. Unfortunately in some areas, people are simply not interested in each other and that is a shame. But you make your own destiny. Good luck...
Quote[/b] (N3TTN @ Oct. 31 2005,08:52)]Quote[/b] ]You're saying the FCC violates the law. #I don't think I will say that. #But face it, comments on here mean less than comments to the FCC, however you feel the FCC handles it.
But I have seen the FCC and other agencies change as a result of comments from citizens. #So I'm not quite as cynical. Also we are not, by law, just "a group of hobbyists".
No, I am NOT saying that they violate the law, where did you come up with that??
What I am saying is that the law requires them to solicit comments and take those commentds into consideration when making the rules. So if they blatently ignore the comments, they are violating the spirit, if not the letter, of the law. If one says they do that, one is saying they violate the law, and I disagree.
I think they DO take them into consideration. I think they will read them and if something is said that gives cause to modify, then they will consider that modification. Note I did NOT say they will tally the "for" and "against". That is not what the comment period is for. The law recognizes that regulations made with more input have a better chance of being successful.
Comments like "I hate code." "I love code.", I vote for" etc. WILL be ignored. That is not what the comment period is for. Reasoned, documented arguments for or against the proposal, and comments adding additional information are those most likely to influence the ruling.
Making a plan, making up their mind, then asking for comments just to ignore them is what I said was illegal, and I don't think they do that.
Nevertheless, the comment period is closed at midnight tonight. I guarantee that they will instuitute with no change, make changes, or drop it altogether. One of the 3.
ke6irp
10-31-2005, 08:09 PM
Dump the code??-- make it easier for folks to get hf--- what a sad day that will be------ something for nothing--- memorize the theory--- gee it's sooo hard---- waaaa----I see nothing in this that improves anything-------- It aint over yet------
k9ekg
10-31-2005, 09:32 PM
Quote[/b] (ke6irp @ Oct. 31 2005,13:09)]I see nothing in this that improves anything-------- It aint over yet------
I see nothing that shows this does not improve anything. Its over....
kd4mxe
10-31-2005, 10:09 PM
Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 31 2005,07:41)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Oct. 31 2005,06:20)]k4jf- sir why dont some of you die Hards take 10 min every day and get on hf and send some code #to help some one ,you want to keep it But you dont wont to help any one ,thats the way you people work,73 Bill
Bill, the CW portion is full most days. #There are lots of folk out there. #I can't get on as much as I would like due to wrist problems (as in medical). #But, as stated, I DO enjoy getting on there and working newcomers, and do so on a regular basis.
Did you read anything in my statements that indicate I am never on CW? #Didn't think so.
k4jf - sir I never said you was not on c w ,But the way you holler about the code you should try and help someone that needs your help , I could use someone to send it a little on the slow side , I hear it on 40m But these hams are sending it at 15 to 20 wpm ,and I can copie a letter or two But they are 2fast for me to wright it down , But I see you cant Help any one you got that covered , so go ahead and do what you do Best ,73 Bill
kd4mxe
10-31-2005, 10:16 PM
Quote[/b] (n5wdz @ Oct. 31 2005,10:12)]I have attempted the code test twice and possibly 3 times but cant remember. We even tried to get others to help us all out by sending us code on the air. #No takers and none interested in doing so. #
So, what do you do? Just keep at it and keep trying until code is eliminated as a requirement. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif I have taken the written test for upgrading to General before attempting the code test. In the meantime, hoped to get some on air help with code, but gotten NONE so far.
n5wdz sir if you want to get the code you can forget these hams they dont help anyone they just complain if you dont get it 73 good luck Bill
ke6irp
10-31-2005, 10:41 PM
Quote[/b] (k9ekg @ Oct. 31 2005,14:32)]Quote[/b] (ke6irp @ Oct. 31 2005,13:09)]I see nothing in this that improves anything-------- #It aint over yet------
I see nothing that shows this does not improve anything. #Its over....
well-- then your vision is pretty finite--- trust me--- the code is not as dead as some people think om--- wait and see and remember I told you....73
K1MVP
11-01-2005, 12:24 AM
Quote[/b] (W9TZU @ Oct. 30 2005,12:12)]We heard the same nonsense when No-Code Techs came in and the service is just fine.
"The service is just fine"??
Oh really,--thats why just last week an "extra" asked me,
"what is AM"?
I looked at him in amazement,--I could not believe an
amateur "extra" did not know what #basic AM modulation
was.
And there are those who still insist that the testing is
"just as hard" as it was 30 years ago,--simply amazing.
Ham CB is not only "on it`s way", it IS here.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # 73, K1MVP
K4WKM
11-01-2005, 01:34 AM
Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Oct. 31 2005,05:45)]Quote[/b] (NU4B @ Oct. 30 2005,19:18)]My two cents: I'm oppsed to no code licensing. I've only heard 3 main arguments against code. 1) There's the "I can't learn it so we should drop it gang". I guess if we have kids that can't learn math we should drop that also. Maybe we have! (Actually I think today a majority of high school students couldn't even find Washington DC on a map.) 2) Then there's the "its too antiquted argument". Its amazing to me to look at recent multimode DXpeditions and see more CW QSO's than SSB. Could it be CW works in bad conditions? In truth CW works better with less bandwidth and less power. Did I once read something about using the minimum amount of power to make a contact? 3) And finally the "other countries have dropped it so we should too" argument. Similar to Johnny jumped off a bridge so we should too. Actually not all countries have dropped it and several have made the decision to retain code.
Cost is more of a barrier to getting more people involved than learning code. (Actually there are a few other societal barriers also but I won't get into that.) Its hard to imagine little Johnny or Mary asking daddy for 3 grand so they can start their new hobby. You can get on HF with a CW rig and wire antenna for well under $100. But we don't teach that.
In any case, the right answer is:
1) A general license - with all HF phone privileges
2) A general + code license (call it an Extra) with all HF phone and all HF code privileges.
3) A novice license with limited HF phone privileges.
Extras will complain that this further dumbs down the license structure - but too late - we've already done that.
Well that's probably more than 2 cents worth. All the best to everyone -
Larry - NU4B
nu4B - sir you said two cents worth, man you got at least 4 cents worth , you do Know the differnce dont you , 73 Bill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Hey you can take a small solar panel a 12 volt battery and a laptop with a small disk and uplink and be world wide with vioce so why do we need cw? think about it.
VE3ELL
11-01-2005, 03:00 AM
In the end the government always gets what it wants no matter what country you live in.Just listen to all those unused repeaters on Vhf & Uhf bands.I rarely hear calls from my own country on the HF bands.In the past 14 years since I obtained my ticket I have seen the bands grow a lot quieter.Please enjoy it while it lasts.Someday we may tell our grand children what it was like to be an Amateur radio Operator, a part of history gone by. 73 Russ VE3ELL http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
k9ekg
11-01-2005, 03:13 AM
Quote[/b] (ke6irp @ Oct. 31 2005,15:41)]Quote[/b] (k9ekg @ Oct. 31 2005,14:32)]Quote[/b] (ke6irp @ Oct. 31 2005,13:09)]I see nothing in this that improves anything-------- It aint over yet------
I see nothing that shows this does not improve anything. Its over....
well-- then your vision is pretty finite--- trust me--- the code is not as dead as some people think om--- wait and see and remember I told you....73
I wasn't trying to promote that CODE was over. I would never fathom this. Hopefully, testing as part of a license class should be. I have nothing against code and find it useful. I want to see the mandatory testing for it abolished. Those that want to use it, by all means go ahead. Those that don't, by all means your choice. I feel its time to move on.
Over 400 filed comments to the FCC just today.
kb6ssn
11-01-2005, 05:12 AM
Let's look at this logically. Why did the FCC have the code requirement there in the first place? In fact, why did the FCC go to all of the trouble to have a Ham Radio service at all? According to their publications the reason is "to have a pool of expertise that the government can draw from in times of need." As the government has all but dropped the code from their pool of needed expertise, I can understand why they would want to drop it from the license requirement. But here's the rub. Why are they not now including new skills they need from within the pool upon which they plan to draw? Simple! Because they no longer plan to draw from that pool! The government of the People, by the People and for the People no longer exists. Government has become the know all and see all to itself. And the People be damned! The government now exists outside the People and is now the oppressor thereof! An educated competent pool of technical expertise is a threat to the government! It allows People to think for themselves instead of allowing the government to think for them! In this day of government sponsored "dumbing down" the last thing the government wants is talented educated people with skills beyond their scope. Otherwise they would be replacing the code requirement with some other skill they need within the pool. But by omitting this new skill they are watering down the pool in an attempt to make it harmless to the government! And they have a lot of time to do it. This directly correlates to the very change of structure that brought on the downfall of the Rome! Rome began life as a Republic. Then they devolved into an Empire. And then they were history. Just like we soon will be. We began our existence as a country as a Republic. (1776 - 1860) Then we became an Empire. (1860 to present) Within the next hundred or so years we'll see the U.S.A. go the same way Rome did. And the dropping of the code requirement is just one very small indication of it happening. But when combined with all of the other small indications put upon us over a timeframe designed to make us comfortable with it, the results is inevitable. Of course there were a group of folks in 1861 who tried to stop the fall of the Republic. But the Empire crushed them to feed it's own avarice. It's very interesting how all events are connected in history. And we began down this road long before Ham Radio ever existed. So, in fact, all roads do indeed lead to Rome! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif And since it was the Romans who developed the first system of Telegraphy widely used, it seems somewhat ironic!
kk6fr
11-01-2005, 05:19 AM
To: K1MVP I know what you mean about the Extra and AM, I know an Extra that could not wire his 8 pin mic plug to switch mics. But then again I know he bought his license (as in $$$$) because not even did he not want to learn the code he did not want to bother with the the whole test thing at all. Something not much talked about out here. I know many that if were retested, well... you get my point. Sad but true, the numbers might (or might not) surprise you.
vk3pjb
11-01-2005, 10:13 AM
Hi
For Quite a while,we hear the lamenting of CW requirement being lifted for ham licence.
If the belief that this requirement will drop the expertise of operators, Why don't the US operators put to the FCC,the reintroduction of yearly re-examination for amateur radio privelidges.
If an operator fails all exam requirement,and i mean all exam requirement,The licence is revoked and the callsign of failed operator reissued to someone who Hs passed the exam
The exam must be passed before the anniversary date of licence
This means ,,CW must be passed,,,theory and regs must be passed and Maybe a Practical test..
The theory test would be the same type as held 30 years ago, that is ,,no tick a box,,,a proper answer in words of any theory topic.
AND there to be no old exam papers to lok at.
SURELY this would be the real solution.
Exam could also include digital questions,,aND theory from 100 years ago
THIS WOULD CERTAINLY enhance the amateur radio licence call,BUT alas MAYBE the licence holder numbers may plummet,,,,,
so really ,why don't the ARRL get a poll going and see who is prepared to be re-examined yearly to rid the bands of the dead wood.
I like CW however as part of the exams ,no, bUT I will fight to the death to keep CW as part of our tranmissions.
vk3pjb
11-01-2005, 10:44 AM
hi all again,
With reference to above comments by me.
The fact is,whether we like it or not,
We are not like the amateurs 90 years ago,
WE do not experiment,,
We use black boxes,commercially made aerials.
We are nothing to really be proud of.
We sit in our little caves calling cq,contesting etc, supposedly making new friends YET we don't even want to know our neighbours,,who could be friends,
We are suspicious of who we show our shack to,,its a secret hideaway.
We use computers,radios,programs,TNCs ,technology we cannot do our selves, yet the persons who develop these fine products WEhams with CW pass try to deny these people an entrance into the fraternity because they have no code,
i am not saying these hams that do not wish to do code are brilliant,but hell,if they can make life easier for us,great.
If get teen computer programers,digital wizards into our hobby,wonderful.
WE must remember that..each skill compliments the other..We must advance ,,
I feel sorry for the poor old CW Horse being whipped.
the poor bugger must be near deaths door by now but I suppose we can get a few more races out of the poor old buggar.
I just hope the Society of prevention of Cruelty to Animals does not get wind of the poor old things continual whipping OR we may be up on charges
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
Quote[/b] ]Hey you can take a small solar panel a 12 volt battery and a laptop with a small disk and uplink and be world wide with vioce so why do we need cw? think about it.
Then why do we need SSB?
KG4RUL
11-01-2005, 01:01 PM
Quote[/b] (NU4B @ Nov. 01 2005,01:11)]Quote[/b] ]Hey you can take a small solar panel a 12 volt battery and a laptop with a small disk and uplink and be world wide with vioce so why do we need cw? think about it.
Then why do we need SSB?
Then why do we need any RF based amateur communications at all?
Dennis http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
w5vpu
11-01-2005, 02:38 PM
Quote[/b] (kk6fr @ Oct. 29 2005,10:45)]Change is the reason for time. # And it's about time for a change.
A rather unusual assumption about the reality of time. Time is nothing more than the way we humans mark our events and history. "Change" is not the reason for time.
Some folks just keep their mouth so busy their brain doesn't have time to function. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Oct. 31 2005,15:09)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 31 2005,07:41)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Oct. 31 2005,06:20)]k4jf- sir why dont some of you die Hards take 10 min every day and get on hf and send some code #to help some one ,you want to keep it But you dont wont to help any one ,thats the way you people work,73 Bill
Bill, the CW portion is full most days. #There are lots of folk out there. #I can't get on as much as I would like due to wrist problems (as in medical). #But, as stated, I DO enjoy getting on there and working newcomers, and do so on a regular basis.
Did you read anything in my statements that indicate I am never on CW? #Didn't think so.
k4jf - sir I never said you was not on c w ,But the way you holler #about the code you should try and help someone that needs your help , I could use someone to send it a little on the slow side , I hear it on 40m But these hams are sending it at 15 to 20 wpm ,and I can copie a letter or two But they are 2fast for me to wright it down , But I see you cant Help any one you got that covered , so go ahead and do what you do Best ,73 Bill
Bill, I see you are in Alabama. From South Carolina, that would be either 80m or 40m. Mind if I phone you and we set up a sked sometime?
kg4llq
11-01-2005, 03:27 PM
I didn't read all the comments on this subject; but I would like to offer my opinion. #I don't really care whether the code test is required to obtain an amateur radio license or not. #What I do care about is that operators maintain a sense of decorum, civility and respect for others. Offenders should be weeded-out & that of course is our responsibility to report those to the FCC.
I am also very concerned about the lack of coordination between nations when it comes to band plans. #Prime example is the lower end of 40 meters in the evening. #I enjoy CW and find it almost impossible to conduct a QSO on 40 meters when there are so many Canadian and Latin stations operating in the CW portion of the band on SSB. #Perhaps we should look at band plans with a more critical eye. #With all manner of digital modes becoming more popular I feel this should be a priority for US and the FCC to assist US in this endeavor.
73 to all,
Ken - KG4LLQ
kd4mxe
11-01-2005, 04:11 PM
Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Nov. 01 2005,07:56)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Oct. 31 2005,15:09)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 31 2005,07:41)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Oct. 31 2005,06:20)]k4jf- sir why dont some of you die Hards take 10 min every day and get on hf and send some code #to help some one ,you want to keep it But you dont wont to help any one ,thats the way you people work,73 Bill
Bill, the CW portion is full most days. #There are lots of folk out there. #I can't get on as much as I would like due to wrist problems (as in medical). #But, as stated, I DO enjoy getting on there and working newcomers, and do so on a regular basis.
Did you read anything in my statements that indicate I am never on CW? #Didn't think so.
k4jf - sir I never said you was not on c w ,But the way you holler #about the code you should try and help someone that needs your help , I could use someone to send it a little on the slow side , I hear it on 40m But these hams are sending it at 15 to 20 wpm ,and I can copie a letter or two But they are 2fast for me to wright it down , But I see you cant Help any one you got that covered , so go ahead and do what you do Best ,73 Bill
Bill, I see you are in Alabama. #From South Carolina, that would be either 80m or 40m. #Mind if I phone you and we set up a sked sometime?
k4jf- just let me know when -73 good luck Bill
kd4mxe
11-01-2005, 04:28 PM
Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all #again,
With reference to above comments by me.
The fact is,whether we like it or not,
We are not like the amateurs 90 years ago,
WE do not experiment,,
We use black boxes,commercially made aerials.
We are nothing to really be proud of.
We sit in our little caves calling cq,contesting etc, supposedly making new friends YET we don't even want to know our neighbours,,who could be friends,
We are suspicious of who we show our shack to,,its a secret hideaway.
We use computers,radios,programs,TNCs ,technology we cannot do our selves, yet the persons #who develop these fine products #WEhams with CW #pass try to deny these people an entrance into the fraternity because they have no code,
i am not saying these hams that do not wish to do code are brilliant,but hell,if they can make life easier for us,great.
If get teen computer programers,digital wizards into our hobby,wonderful.
WE must remember that..each skill compliments the other..We must advance ,,
I feel sorry for the poor old CW Horse being whipped.
the poor bugger must be near deaths door by now but I suppose we can get a few more races out of the poor old buggar.
I just hope the Society of prevention of Cruelty to Animals does not get wind of the poor old things #continual whipping OR we may be up on charges
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
FWIW, and for those who care.
It's "73" not "73s"
kk6fr
11-01-2005, 06:57 PM
W5VPU, Try thinking outside the box.
Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,12:28)]Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all again,
With reference to above comments by me.
[/b]
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
Interesting. Whether or not we have CW in the US doesn't affect you (PJB), yet you seem to have a keen interest on just that. I suppose you feel it will open the market to the system that you are presently touting.
As far as thinking out of the box... we wouldn't have this problem if more people did. To contain one's thinking to be obsessed with Not being able to pass a simple 5 wpm code test is definitely boxing oneself in.
As far as NPRM 05-235, it's history and probably already in the circular file somewhere in DC.
Quote[/b] (KG4RUL @ Nov. 01 2005,06:01)]Then why do we need any RF based amateur communications at all?
It is called Amateur Radio...
Without RF based communications, it would be Amateur, but not radio.
N5GLR
11-01-2005, 07:10 PM
N5WDZ and others struggling to learn Morse Code:
# It's obvious, you have access to a computer (you posted here) so, you have no excuse NOT to learn CW whether you can get on the air or not. #There are many FREE CW software programs available for download that will have you copying code much faster than 5 wpm in very short order. #The program I used, and can highly recommend, is "G4FON" CW Trainer (please give this program a try even if you have another one). #Enter that call sign into any search engine and it will give you the link to the page where it can be downloaded for FREE. #Practice at least 30 minutes a day copying and you'll have it mastered in about 2 months (or less). #Remember, all you need to pass the test is to "copy" 5 wpm or 1 minute without error. #Easy pickins.
# #One important piece of advice, if you're trying to learn Morse Code by counting the dits and dahs, STOP IT. #Set the "character speed" (how fast the dits and dahs are sent) on your software to around 15 wpm and learn the "sound" of each character ... you can set the WPM speed (how closely spaced the characters are) to what ever you want but the "character speed" needs to be set so you don't have time to count the dits and dahs. #Otherwise, you're spinning your wheels and you'll still be struggling a year from now. #
# #In my opinion, anyone trying to teach Morse Code using "character" speeds any slower is doing more harm than good. #Once you can hear and recognize a few characters it will become easier and easier to learn the rest.
# #If you can dance or just tap your foot to the beat of music, you can learn Morse Code. #Anyone with half a sense of rhythm can do it. #All of you frustrated drummers out there (yes, I mean you dash board and steering wheel beaters too) ... #You can do it if you TRY.
For those of you without rhythm, buy, beg, borrow a few 50's and 60's rock and roll CDs or tapes and play them every chance you get. #Especially Chuck Berry ... the real king of rock and roll. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
Sincerely,
Garry
N5GLR
N2NH, I suspect that you are correct and it is all over except for the crying.
I keep hearing that Amateur Radio will not "morph" into "CB". #
However, every day, I hear new Technicians proclaiming their desire to operate HF and that they can hardly wait until the rulemaking is done. #
During these conversations, I also hear terms such as #"3s to ya", "3s and 8s to everyone." #"First personal here is __." #"73rds, or 3rds to ya" #"QSL" at the beginning of each transmission. #I'm destinated at the QTH". #IMHO, these are all the beginnings of the metamorphosis.
ke6irp
11-01-2005, 07:22 PM
Quote[/b] (k9ekg @ Oct. 31 2005,20:13)]Quote[/b] (ke6irp @ Oct. 31 2005,15:41)]Quote[/b] (k9ekg @ Oct. 31 2005,14:32)]Quote[/b] (ke6irp @ Oct. 31 2005,13:09)]I see nothing in this that improves anything-------- #It aint over yet------
I see nothing that shows this does not improve anything. #Its over....
well-- then your vision is pretty finite--- trust me--- the code is not as dead as some people think om--- wait and see and remember I told you....73
I wasn't trying to promote that CODE was over. #I would never fathom this. #Hopefully, testing as part of a license class should be. I have nothing against code and find it useful. #I want to see the mandatory testing for it abolished. Those that want to use it, by all means go ahead. #Those that don't, by all means your choice. #I feel its time to move on.
No-- I followed what you were saying-- and my point is this in response--- the FCC will not be eliminating code as a requirement in the way some people out here think-- wait and see...73 de ke6irp
Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 01 2005,15:19)]N2NH, I suspect that you are correct and it is all over except for the crying.
I agree that eventually it will be hard to tell the difference between CB and HF. There are times that I notice that on 2M and 70cm already.
As far as the crying, here's a good look at our old NCI poster IRL and his posting for the NPRM 05-235. If you're so interested in the "Future" on VHF/UHF and VOIP, what do you need HF for?? FWIW, on with the show, this is it. (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518167867)
Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:34)]Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 01 2005,15:19)]N2NH, I suspect that you are correct and it is all over except for the crying.
I agree that eventually it will be hard to tell the difference between CB and HF. #There are times that I notice that on 2M and 70cm already.
As far as the crying, here's a good look at our old NCI poster IRL and his posting for the NPRM 05-235. #If you're so interested in the "Future" on VHF/UHF and VOIP, what do you need HF for?? #FWIW, on with the show, this is it. (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518167867)
It is my opinion that the "eliminate the code" group will flock to the HF bands once the rulemaking is done. #However, once their "we won, we won" backslapping of each other is over, I think think most of them will not find much of an audience on the bands and will be gone quite quickly.
wa3vjb
11-01-2005, 07:58 PM
Has anyone noticed what the group in Newington filed?
League's Official Comment (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518176064)
Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 01 2005,11:26)]FWIW, and for those who care.
It's #"73" # not # "73s"
Correct. Thanx.
Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:34)]Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 01 2005,15:19)]N2NH, I suspect that you are correct and it is all over except for the crying.
I agree that eventually it will be hard to tell the difference between CB and HF. #There are times that I notice that on 2M and 70cm already.
As far as the crying, here's a good look at our old NCI poster IRL and his posting for the NPRM 05-235. #If you're so interested in the "Future" on VHF/UHF and VOIP, what do you need HF for?? #FWIW, on with the show, this is it. (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518167867)
Interesting writeup. Complete with many errors and invalid assumptions buried within.
yv5lix
11-01-2005, 11:01 PM
Hello,
Interesting subject with many points of view, in my opinion the code should not be mandatory for novices.
Now to my point, all I have read is that if approved new hams may no longer require to pass a 5 wpm CW test for an entry level license; but, what about the other classes?, will the FCC require the code to obtain a higher class license?
73/DX YV5LIX
kd4mxe
11-02-2005, 01:06 AM
Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:04)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,12:28)]Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all #again,
With reference to above comments by me.
[/b]
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
Interesting. #Whether or not we have CW in the US doesn't affect you (PJB), yet you seem to have a keen interest on just that. #I suppose you feel it will open the market to the system that you are presently touting. #
As far as thinking out of the box... we wouldn't have this problem if more people did. #To contain one's thinking to be obsessed with Not being able to pass a simple 5 wpm code test is definitely boxing oneself in. #
As far as NPRM 05-235, it's history and probably already in the circular file somewhere in DC.
n2nh - well john I dont know how well you know your code ,But it sounds like you know your stuff , 73 Bill
K4WKM
11-02-2005, 01:48 AM
Quote[/b] (NU4B @ Nov. 01 2005,05:11)]Quote[/b] ]Hey you can take a small solar panel a 12 volt battery and a laptop with a small disk and uplink and be world wide with vioce so why do we need cw? think about it.
Then why do we need SSB?
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif? we don't
K1MVP
11-02-2005, 02:38 AM
Quote[/b] (ai4cb @ Nov. 01 2005,18:20)]There's this strange undercurrent in much of the ARRL approach to licensing restructuring to the effect that, amateur radio will be much healthier if we give HF priviledges to as many people as possible. #Frankly I do not think it is lack of HF priviledges that is the problem. That is, if there is a problem. The ARRL sees a large percentage of Technicians that go inactive and inteprets that as evidence of the upgrade to HF privileges being too difficult. Implicit in that would be that having HF privileges alone makes you a life-long ham. I intepret it as simply there were too many people getting Technician licenses who just weren't really interested in radio.
The ARRL`s proposal to the FCC to give "automatic
upgrades" to the technician class is rediculous, and I
was glad to see the FCC reject it.
It was just an effort to get many "instant generals"
on the air to "boost" the HF population for obvious
reasons,--more buyers of new HF equipment and more
"instant ARRL members".
Back in the late 60`s the ARRL sponsored "incentive
licensing" where the general class licensee lost HF
privileges, and had to retest to upgrade to advanced
to get back the original privileges they had as a general.
35 years later,--the ARRL now sponsors a "giveaway"
to techs with this stupid "automatic upgrade" to general,
--makes a lot of sense??
The written exams, nowadays are not that hard, that
a guy should be able to upgrade without that much effort
especially with the elimination of the cw requirement.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # #73, K1MVP http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
Quote[/b] (K4WKM @ Nov. 01 2005,18:48)]Quote[/b] (NU4B @ Nov. 01 2005,05:11)]Quote[/b] ]Hey you can take a small solar panel a 12 volt battery and a laptop with a small disk and uplink and be world wide with vioce so why do we need cw? think about it.
Then why do we need SSB?
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif? we don't
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Actually I think we need both. We need a no code HF license and a code tested HF license for those people using the CW part of the bands. Code is a skill. If you can't learn it, then you can't. We're not all basketball players either. But those that use the CW portions should be tested. To eliminate code testing all together doesn't make much sense.
I think some people only recognize their callsign and 599 in code now. Why else would people continually call a station that calls another station or call a station that calls CQ EU (or where ever) when they are in the US? (Please don't answer that question because I think the answer might be they really don't care.)
I don't know, it doesn't seem that complicated to me. If I were President.......... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
W0UZR
11-02-2005, 06:04 AM
Quote[/b] (K1MVP @ Oct. 31 2005,18:24)]Quote[/b] (W9TZU @ Oct. 30 2005,12:12)]We heard the same nonsense when No-Code Techs came in and the service is just fine.
"The service is just fine"??
Oh really,--thats why just last week an "extra" asked me,
"what is AM"?
I looked at him in amazement,--I could not believe an
amateur "extra" did not know what #basic AM modulation
was.
And there are those who still insist that the testing is
"just as hard" as it was 30 years ago,--simply amazing.
Ham CB is not only "on it`s way", it IS here.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # 73, K1MVP
And if the service is still ok, then is that why that when someone that was in the middle of some important traffic on the net lost his audio and continued in code, and the net control was hollering,,,
"DOES ANYBODY KNOW CODE?"
"DOES ANYBODY KNOW CODE?"
And I think he was an extra too.....
kd4mxe
11-02-2005, 12:41 PM
Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:04)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,12:28)]Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all #again,
With reference to above comments by me.
[/b]
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
Interesting. #Whether or not we have CW in the US doesn't affect you (PJB), yet you seem to have a keen interest on just that. #I suppose you feel it will open the market to the system that you are presently touting. #
As far as thinking out of the box... we wouldn't have this problem if more people did. #To contain one's thinking to be obsessed with Not being able to pass a simple 5 wpm code test is definitely boxing oneself in. #
As far as NPRM 05-235, it's history and probably already in the circular file somewhere in DC.
n2nh - ok if you say so 73 Bill
Quote[/b] (kb0uzr @ Nov. 01 2005,23:04)][And if the service is still ok, then is that why that when someone that was in the middle of some important traffic on the net lost his audio and continued in code, and the net control was hollering,,,
# # # # # # # "DOES ANYBODY KNOW CODE?"
# # # # # # # # # #"DOES ANYBODY KNOW CODE?"
And I think he was an extra too.....
in 1999, ARES held their drill for the state of Georgia. #I was designated as a relay station to pass the local 2 meter traffic to Atlanta. #So as to simulate an actual emergency condition, I fed my IC728 into an 80 meter hamstick on my pick up. #I made quite a number of attempts on SSB to check in with the Net Control Station, without success. #So, I tuned ever so slightly off frequency and switched to CW. # Immediately stations on the net began saying, #"There's a station trying to check in on CW.", everyone stood by and I made a successful contact with a station who was not the net control station but could, unlike the net control, copy Morse Code, and he passed the traffic to NCS.
After the conclusion of the emergency simulation, #I heard many of the stations, including net control, commenting that they wished they could still copy the code.
I did what I did for the very purpose of proving a point about morse/cw. #It worked, SSB didn't. #Many will read this and say "PSK31 would have worked just as well if not better" #They would probably be correct but, I didn't have a computer and very few of the stations on the net had PSK31 capability, as I learned when I joined the roundtable after the conclusion of the simulation.
Conclusion! #CW gets it done. #EOS.
Quote[/b] (ai4cb @ Nov. 01 2005,18:20)]Quote[/b] (wa3vjb @ Nov. 01 2005,15:58)]Has anyone noticed what the group in Newington filed?
League's Official Comment (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518176064)
Yes. Saw that.
I don't follow their reasoning but basically what they are saying is that if the 5wpm test is eliminated, then there's no way for "entry level" Technicians to upgrade to Tech Plus to gain HF priviledges. So they want to automatically give HF priviledges to all Technicians. And they want to considerably expand those HF priviledges well beyond what the Tech Plus is allowed now.
The way I see it though, with the elimination of the Morse testing, the new "entry level" for HF will in fact become the General license, not the Tech Plus license.
The Technician license will continue to serve very well for those who don't want or need HF access. #Any Technicians who does want HF access will simply have to pass the General written test. I don't understand the big problem with that. Many (most) people pass both tests in one session as it is now. I don't understand why the ARRL thinks that there is a need for two entry-level HF licenses.
There's this strange undercurrent in much of the ARRL approach to licensing restructuring to the effect that, amateur radio will be much healthier if we give HF priviledges to as many people as possible. #Frankly I do not think it is lack of HF priviledges that is the problem. That is, if there is a problem. The ARRL sees a large percentage of Technicians that go inactive and inteprets that as evidence of the upgrade to HF privileges being too difficult. Implicit in that would be that having HF privileges alone makes you a life-long ham. I intepret it as simply there were too many people getting Technician licenses who just weren't really interested in radio.
Quote[/b] ]
I don't follow their reasoning but basically what they are saying is that if the 5wpm test is eliminated, then there's no way for "entry level" Technicians to upgrade to Tech Plus to gain HF priviledges. So they want to automatically give HF priviledges to all Technicians. And they want to considerably expand those HF priviledges well beyond what the Tech Plus is allowed now.
That's right. A number of the 18 proposals asked for
something like that. FCC denied all of them.
Quote[/b] ]
The Technician license will continue to serve very well for those who don't want or need HF access. #Any Technicians who does want HF access will simply have to pass the General written test. I don't understand the big problem with that. Many (most) people pass both tests in one session as it is now. I don't understand why the ARRL thinks that there is a need for two entry-level HF licenses.
I think what ARRL and others are thinking goes something like this:
Until about 20 years ago, most new hams started
out on HF. Or at least they had some HF privileges.
And many who started out that way are still active
hams, or were lifelong hams.
More recently, most new hams start #out on VHF/UHF.
This was going on even before the Tech lost its code
test in 1991. Repeaters, HTs and compact mobile
VHF/UHF rigs and antennas made it easy.
But we've also seen a lot of dropouts from that time.
Many repeaters are much more quiet than they used
to be. The renewal rate of Techs isn't as high as the
other classes.
So maybe what they're trying to do is to go back to
the old days when most hams either started out on
HF, or at least started out with some HF privileges.
73 de Jim, N2EY
wa4dou
11-02-2005, 04:40 PM
It is indeed true that cw gets it done. While PSK31 is touted as having even greater performance, in theory perhaps, in the real world it does not. Don't just believe me on this. Do it. But if you have poor ears or are not accomplished at cw operation into the noise, forget it. Those that say PSK31 outperforms cw, are wrong.
ke6irp
11-02-2005, 06:12 PM
Quote[/b] (ai4cb @ Nov. 01 2005,18:20)]Quote[/b] (wa3vjb @ Nov. 01 2005,15:58)]Has anyone noticed what the group in Newington filed?
League's Official Comment (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518176064)
Yes. Saw that.
I don't follow their reasoning but basically what they are saying is that if the 5wpm test is eliminated, then there's no way for "entry level" Technicians to upgrade to Tech Plus to gain HF priviledges. So they want to automatically give HF priviledges to all Technicians. And they want to considerably expand those HF priviledges well beyond what the Tech Plus is allowed now.
No question about it-- The arrl has widely opened the whole thing up---- they want thier cronies in the industry to sell more gear--- the conflicts here are so thick--- what a sad joke the arrl has become...
kd4mxe
11-02-2005, 06:44 PM
Quote[/b] (ke6irp @ Nov. 02 2005,11:12)]Quote[/b] (ai4cb @ Nov. 01 2005,18:20)]Quote[/b] (wa3vjb @ Nov. 01 2005,15:58)]Has anyone noticed what the group in Newington filed?
League's Official Comment (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518176064)
Yes. Saw that.
I don't follow their reasoning but basically what they are saying is that if the 5wpm test is eliminated, then there's no way for "entry level" Technicians to upgrade to Tech Plus to gain HF priviledges. So they want to automatically give HF priviledges to all Technicians. And they want to considerably expand those HF priviledges well beyond what the Tech Plus is allowed now.
No question about it-- The arrl has widely opened the whole thing up---- they want thier cronies in the industry to sell more gear--- the conflicts here are so thick--- what a sad joke the arrl has become...
well not trying to upset anyone But I started saveing up money when this thing First started and I am well over $3500 Right now and still going up I dont know how much I will have ,But I am going to save it up till they cut it lose , and I am trying to learn the code to, you guys thats sending code on 40m kind of slow keep it up I am getting a lot of it maby it will sink in soon ,73 good luck to all Bill
Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,21:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:04)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,12:28)]Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all again,
With reference to above comments by me.
[/b]
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
Interesting. Whether or not we have CW in the US doesn't affect you (PJB), yet you seem to have a keen interest on just that. I suppose you feel it will open the market to the system that you are presently touting.
As far as thinking out of the box... we wouldn't have this problem if more people did. To contain one's thinking to be obsessed with Not being able to pass a simple 5 wpm code test is definitely boxing oneself in.
As far as NPRM 05-235, it's history and probably already in the circular file somewhere in DC.
n2nh - well john I dont know how well you know your code ,But it sounds like you know your stuff , 73 Bill
Thanks. I got my 1st Radiotelephone License years ago and long before my Amateur License. The FCC pretty much did the same thing with that license. After being licensed for over 30 years now, their way of thinking doesn't seem to have changed that much. I was thinking of getting my Radiotelegraph license, but it would just be wallpaper - an anachronism from another time. The code isn't a big deal, and that's from someone who didn't think he could learn it either. Within 2-1/2 to 3 months, I was able to copy 13 wpm. The hard thing about it is the mental block that we form. If you want to do it you can.
The problem I see with PJB is that he's posted his opinion, and a large post it is, then wants to shut the door after he's done with the 'beating a dead horse' bit. Sorry, but we all have opinions. And if you've got a US call, these matters will directly affect you and the license you have earned.
kd4mxe
11-02-2005, 07:09 PM
Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 02 2005,11:53)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,21:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:04)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,12:28)]Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all #again,
With reference to above comments by me.
[/b]
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
Interesting. #Whether or not we have CW in the US doesn't affect you (PJB), yet you seem to have a keen interest on just that. #I suppose you feel it will open the market to the system that you are presently touting. #
As far as thinking out of the box... we wouldn't have this problem if more people did. #To contain one's thinking to be obsessed with Not being able to pass a simple 5 wpm code test is definitely boxing oneself in. #
As far as NPRM 05-235, it's history and probably already in the circular file somewhere in DC.
n2nh - well john I dont know how well you know your code ,But it sounds like #you know your stuff , 73 Bill
Thanks. #I got my 1st Radiotelephone License years ago and long before my Amateur License. #The FCC pretty much did the same thing with that license. #After being licensed for over 30 years now, their way of thinking doesn't seem to have changed that much. #I was thinking of getting my Radiotelegraph license, but it would just be wallpaper - an anachronism from another time. #The code isn't a big deal, and that's from someone who didn't think he could learn it either. #Within 2-1/2 to 3 months, I was able to copy 13 wpm. #The hard thing about it is the mental block that we form. #If you want to do it you can.
The problem I see with PJB is that he's posted his opinion, and a large post it is, then wants to shut the door after he's done with the 'beating a dead horse' bit. #Sorry, but we all have opinions. #And if you've got a US call, these matters will directly affect you and the license you have earned.
n2nh -well thats good glad you did ,not that good with me tho I have Been trying it for 6or 7 mo now and can copy some But not good enought to pass the test yet , 73 good luck Bill
Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 02 2005,12:09)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 02 2005,11:53)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,21:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:04)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,12:28)]Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all #again,
With reference to above comments by me.
[/b]
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
Interesting. #Whether or not we have CW in the US doesn't affect you (PJB), yet you seem to have a keen interest on just that. #I suppose you feel it will open the market to the system that you are presently touting. #
As far as thinking out of the box... we wouldn't have this problem if more people did. #To contain one's thinking to be obsessed with Not being able to pass a simple 5 wpm code test is definitely boxing oneself in. #
As far as NPRM 05-235, it's history and probably already in the circular file somewhere in DC.
n2nh - well john I dont know how well you know your code ,But it sounds like #you know your stuff , 73 Bill
Thanks. #I got my 1st Radiotelephone License years ago and long before my Amateur License. #The FCC pretty much did the same thing with that license. #After being licensed for over 30 years now, their way of thinking doesn't seem to have changed that much. #I was thinking of getting my Radiotelegraph license, but it would just be wallpaper - an anachronism from another time. #The code isn't a big deal, and that's from someone who didn't think he could learn it either. #Within 2-1/2 to 3 months, I was able to copy 13 wpm. #The hard thing about it is the mental block that we form. #If you want to do it you can.
The problem I see with PJB is that he's posted his opinion, and a large post it is, then wants to shut the door after he's done with the 'beating a dead horse' bit. #Sorry, but we all have opinions. #And if you've got a US call, these matters will directly affect you and the license you have earned.
n2nh -well thats good glad you did ,not that good with me tho #I have Been trying it for 6or 7 mo now and can copy some But not good enought to pass the test #yet , 73 good luck Bill
For the life of me, I just can't understand why 5wpm is difficult to learn?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
I learned morse code in 1959 with a buddy of mine, and I, sending to each other with a CPO. #
With all of the training aids that are available today, such as morse academy (I had the Ameco three record code practice set), 5wpm should be a piece of cake.
The exam is a QSO, or portions therof, and most of the questions, or fill in the blank, can almost be anticipated.
Using a DX-20 and Hammarlund HQ100, I got on the air and in no time had 13+ wpm. #It's an amazing thing that happens when you are trying to figure out what the other station is saying in a QSO and all of the sudden you realize that you code speed has increased tremendously.
Of couse, as with all things, your mileage may vary.
Everybody does learn at their own pace. I was always told to practice 15 minutes in the morning (before work) and 15 minutes in the evening (after supper). Start with 4 or 5 letters and add on every week or so. Try not to listen to the dots and dashes. That's memorizing and will hold you back - the letters will come after awhile and -.- will be "K" not "dah, dit, dah." If you can squeeze in a practice session or two besides that it's gravy. The VEC at the club I'm in swears women learn faster than men do. There's been cases where women get 5 wpm in a week or two, especially if they have a friend who's interested too. Impressive. I know what you mean about how the mind starts picking up on the speed. After I passed the 13 wpm General, I couldn't operate because of family illness. I tried a few years later and it came back pretty quickly. Ended up getting to 38wpm in 6 months. It can be done - people, myself included, definitely box themselves in by over thinking the code. It's like falling off a log. Just keep practicing and it will happen. It will also be easy. If you're like me, you'll wonder why you thought it was so hard.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 02 2005,12:49)]Everybody does learn at their own pace. #I was always told to practice 15 minutes in the morning (before work) and 15 minutes in the evening (after supper). #Start with 4 or 5 letters and add on every week or so. #Try not to listen to the dots and dashes. #That's memorizing and will hold you back - the letters will come after awhile and -.- will be "K" not "dah, dit, dah." #If you can squeeze in a practice session or two besides that it's gravy. #The VEC at the club I'm in swears women learn faster than men do. #There's been cases where women get 5 wpm in a week or two, especially if they have a friend who's interested too. #Impressive. #I know what you mean about how the mind starts picking up on the speed. #After I passed the 13 wpm General, I couldn't operate because of family illness. #I tried a few years later and it came back pretty quickly. #Ended up getting to 38wpm in 6 months. #It can be done - people, myself included, definitely box themselves in by over thinking the code. #It's like falling off a log. #Just keep practicing and it will happen. #It will also be easy. #If you're like me, you'll wonder why you thought it was so hard.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
John,
I get rather put out with people who say to me, "Why should I learn it, I'll never use it?".
Well, I had to learn about time constants, Polar co-ordinates, angles of deflection, isotropic radiators, Inductors in series, epogee, perigee, & etc. and I'll never use any of that. So, why should I have to be tested on it.
Well, it's part of the exam and you just get busy and learn it.
Unfortunately, most don't see it that way.
wa4dou
11-02-2005, 08:52 PM
I think the thing that agitated most was the prevalent modern atitude that " I want a ham license but I don't want it bad enough to learn Morse code", whereas, years ago the attitude was completely different. Please explain to me how the two differing attitudes find common ground? The fact is they're two completely different critters.
There's always been the type of prospective ham who let the Code stop them. For every ham I know that went for it and passed, there's at least 3 or 4 who over estimated the code as a barrier. My Father was one who couldn't come to grips with learning it and felt it was too hard. I would've liked to see him on the bands, but when he was alive, that was the exam. The only common ground will be if Old Timers who passed the CW element ever come to accept the NCGs and NCEs. If they don't then there will never really be any common ground.
KC2NHB
11-02-2005, 10:51 PM
Let’s face it. It’s not code vs no-code. It’s the industry that is really pushing for the change. It is simple economics. How do you increase your customer base? Simple, Change the rules.
Example.
Add the total number of Novices and Tech/+, you get about
383,583 Licenses
Let’s assume that 10% will upgrade. With the average cost of a HF rig at $1,500.
383,583 * 10% = 38,358
38,358 * $1,500 = $57,537,000
Over 57 million dollars in potential sales.
You can all think it's just code vs no-code, Right
kd4mxe
11-02-2005, 11:54 PM
Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 02 2005,12:18)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 02 2005,12:09)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 02 2005,11:53)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,21:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:04)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,12:28)]Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all #again,
With reference to above comments by me.
[/b]
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
Interesting. #Whether or not we have CW in the US doesn't affect you (PJB), yet you seem to have a keen interest on just that. #I suppose you feel it will open the market to the system that you are presently touting. #
As far as thinking out of the box... we wouldn't have this problem if more people did. #To contain one's thinking to be obsessed with Not being able to pass a simple 5 wpm code test is definitely boxing oneself in. #
As far as NPRM 05-235, it's history and probably already in the circular file somewhere in DC.
n2nh - well john I dont know how well you know your code ,But it sounds like #you know your stuff , 73 Bill
Thanks. #I got my 1st Radiotelephone License years ago and long before my Amateur License. #The FCC pretty much did the same thing with that license. #After being licensed for over 30 years now, their way of thinking doesn't seem to have changed that much. #I was thinking of getting my Radiotelegraph license, but it would just be wallpaper - an anachronism from another time. #The code isn't a big deal, and that's from someone who didn't think he could learn it either. #Within 2-1/2 to 3 months, I was able to copy 13 wpm. #The hard thing about it is the mental block that we form. #If you want to do it you can.
The problem I see with PJB is that he's posted his opinion, and a large post it is, then wants to shut the door after he's done with the 'beating a dead horse' bit. #Sorry, but we all have opinions. #And if you've got a US call, these matters will directly affect you and the license you have earned.
n2nh -well thats good glad you did ,not that good with me tho #I have Been trying it for 6or 7 mo now and can copy some But not good enought to pass the test #yet , 73 good luck Bill
For the life of me, I just can't understand why 5wpm is difficult to learn?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
I learned morse code in 1959 with a buddy of mine, and I, sending to each other with a CPO. #
With all of the training aids that are available today, such as morse academy (I had the Ameco three record code practice set), 5wpm should be a piece of cake.
The exam is a QSO, or portions therof, and most of the questions, or fill in the blank, can almost be anticipated.
Using a DX-20 and Hammarlund HQ100, I got on the air and in no time had 13+ wpm. #It's an amazing thing that happens when you are trying to figure out what the other station is saying in a QSO and all of the sudden you realize that you code speed has increased tremendously.
Of couse, as with all things, your mileage may vary.
nc5s - sir I have heard of a lot of people that pick it up petter quick , I do not have anyone to work with ,I have a cd for computor , i just cant get it that fast ,But I am trying , if you want to call Me dum then go ahead I just cant get it that fast its slow for me , 73 Bill
kd4mxe
11-03-2005, 12:07 AM
Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 02 2005,13:14)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 02 2005,12:49)]Everybody does learn at their own pace. #I was always told to practice 15 minutes in the morning (before work) and 15 minutes in the evening (after supper). #Start with 4 or 5 letters and add on every week or so. #Try not to listen to the dots and dashes. #That's memorizing and will hold you back - the letters will come after awhile and -.- will be "K" not "dah, dit, dah." #If you can squeeze in a practice session or two besides that it's gravy. #The VEC at the club I'm in swears women learn faster than men do. #There's been cases where women get 5 wpm in a week or two, especially if they have a friend who's interested too. #Impressive. #I know what you mean about how the mind starts picking up on the speed. #After I passed the 13 wpm General, I couldn't operate because of family illness. #I tried a few years later and it came back pretty quickly. #Ended up getting to 38wpm in 6 months. #It can be done - people, myself included, definitely box themselves in by over thinking the code. #It's like falling off a log. #Just keep practicing and it will happen. #It will also be easy. #If you're like me, you'll wonder why you thought it was so hard.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
John,
I get rather put out with people who say to me, "Why should I learn it, I'll never use it?".
Well, I had to learn about time constants, Polar co-ordinates, angles of deflection, isotropic radiators, Inductors in series, epogee, perigee, #& etc. and I'll never use any of that. So, why should I have to be tested on it.
Well, it's part of the exam and you just get busy and learn it.
Unfortunately, most don't see it that way.
nc5s well sir I am not going to use it eather dont care for it , just want to learn to Rec it to get on hf thats it 73 Bill
kd4mxe
11-03-2005, 12:14 AM
Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 02 2005,14:50)]There's always been the type of prospective ham who let the Code stop them. #For every ham I know that went for it and passed, there's at least 3 or 4 who over estimated the code as a barrier. #My Father was one who couldn't come to grips with learning it and felt it was too hard. #I would've liked to see him on the bands, #but when he was alive, that was the exam. #The only common ground will be if Old Timers who passed the CW element ever come to accept the NCGs and NCEs. #If they don't then there will never really be any common ground.
n2nh - yes that just about says it for me to , in the last 38 years I tried it 3 times , so finely I just give up Back then But I have more time to study now so I am doing Better now , 73Bill
Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 02 2005,13:53)]I got my 1st Radiotelephone License years ago and long before my Amateur License.
You too? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
1st RadioTelephone issued 1980. First ham ticket issued in 1991.
Quote[/b] ]The FCC pretty much did the same thing with that license.
Yep, they sure did. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Quote[/b] ]Sorry, but we all have opinions. And if you've got a US call, these matters will directly affect you and the license you have earned.
Then explain to me: 3699 comments filed; 660,000+ licensed hams.
Here endth the lesson. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
K1MVP
11-03-2005, 01:09 AM
Quote[/b] (n3jja @ Nov. 02 2005,17:21)]Then explain to me: 3699 comments filed; 660,000+ licensed hams.
Here endth the lesson. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Well if the figures are correct on a recent posting on this
thread,--of a total of approx 660,000 licensed hams,
and approx 383,000 novices and techs,--that would leave
about 277,000 generals, advanced and extra`s.
Now the question would be how many of these with HF
privileges are "active" in one form or another?
also,--how many care one way or another,--how many
if they do care, might be reluctant to "voice" an opinion,
and how many might think,--"its a done deal", so why
bother?
And then there are many,--who are not even aware
of what`s going on as they are too busy with earning
a living in today`s world.
My question would be with over 600,000 hams,--why is
it the ARRL has only about 150,000 members
at best?
# # # # # # # # # # # # #73, K1MVP
# # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
ai4me
11-03-2005, 01:32 AM
As long as were throwing out numbers, take into consideration that of the supposed 600,000 amateur licensees and only 150,000 of them are ARRL members, this still constitutes the largest single organization of amateurs in the US.
K1MVP
11-03-2005, 01:58 AM
Quote[/b] (ai4me @ Nov. 02 2005,18:32)]As long as were throwing out numbers, take into consideration that of the supposed 600,000 amateur licensees and only 150,000 of them are ARRL members, this still constitutes the largest single organization of amateurs in the US.
Thats still only 25 percent of the total ham population,
--hardly anything to "toot" about.
And it seems to me,--in a recent survey I saw that the
majority of the members DO NOT feel the league
represents their interests.
If that`s the the case, something is "amiss" in ham
radio.
73, K1MVP http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
W0UZR
11-03-2005, 12:08 PM
Quote[/b] (ke6irp @ Nov. 02 2005,12:12)]Quote[/b] (ai4cb @ Nov. 01 2005,18:20)]Quote[/b] (wa3vjb @ Nov. 01 2005,15:58)]Has anyone noticed what the group in Newington filed?
League's Official Comment (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518176064)
Yes. Saw that.
I don't follow their reasoning but basically what they are saying is that if the 5wpm test is eliminated, then there's no way for "entry level" Technicians to upgrade to Tech Plus to gain HF priviledges. So they want to automatically give HF priviledges to all Technicians. And they want to considerably expand those HF priviledges well beyond what the Tech Plus is allowed now.
No question about it-- The arrl has widely opened the whole thing up---- they want thier cronies in the industry to sell more gear--- the conflicts here are so thick--- what a sad joke the arrl has become...
Quote[/b] ]No question about it-- The arrl has widely opened the whole thing up---- they want their cronies in the industry to sell more gear--- the conflicts here are so thick--- what a sad joke the arrl has become...
You said the whole thing right there. It's ALL about MONEY! Isn't it pretty obvious, even to the people that are Waiting to get on HF the easy way can see that if the ARRL was concerned about the service, and wanted to protect the Quality of it, then they sure as (youKnowWhat) wouldn't even Think of doing what they are doing.!!
W0UZR
11-03-2005, 01:05 PM
Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 02 2005,13:18)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 02 2005,12:09)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 02 2005,11:53)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,21:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Nov. 01 2005,12:04)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 01 2005,12:28)]Quote[/b] (vk3pjb @ Nov. 01 2005,03:44)]hi all again,
With reference to above comments by me.
[/b]
Maybe we should give the poor old nag a rest
vk3pjb- sir you have a good post there , 73 Bill
Interesting. Whether or not we have CW in the US doesn't affect you (PJB), yet you seem to have a keen interest on just that. I suppose you feel it will open the market to the system that you are presently touting.
As far as thinking out of the box... we wouldn't have this problem if more people did. To contain one's thinking to be obsessed with Not being able to pass a simple 5 wpm code test is definitely boxing oneself in.
As far as NPRM 05-235, it's history and probably already in the circular file somewhere in DC.
n2nh - well john I dont know how well you know your code ,But it sounds like you know your stuff , 73 Bill
Thanks. I got my 1st Radiotelephone License years ago and long before my Amateur License. The FCC pretty much did the same thing with that license. After being licensed for over 30 years now, their way of thinking doesn't seem to have changed that much. I was thinking of getting my Radiotelegraph license, but it would just be wallpaper - an anachronism from another time. The code isn't a big deal, and that's from someone who didn't think he could learn it either. Within 2-1/2 to 3 months, I was able to copy 13 wpm. The hard thing about it is the mental block that we form. If you want to do it you can.
The problem I see with PJB is that he's posted his opinion, and a large post it is, then wants to shut the door after he's done with the 'beating a dead horse' bit. Sorry, but we all have opinions. And if you've got a US call, these matters will directly affect you and the license you have earned.
n2nh -well thats good glad you did ,not that good with me tho I have Been trying it for 6or 7 mo now and can copy some But not good enought to pass the test yet , 73 good luck Bill
For the life of me, I just can't understand why 5wpm is difficult to learn?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
I learned morse code in 1959 with a buddy of mine, and I, sending to each other with a CPO.
With all of the training aids that are available today, such as morse academy (I had the Ameco three record code practice set), 5wpm should be a piece of cake.
The exam is a QSO, or portions therof, and most of the questions, or fill in the blank, can almost be anticipated.
Using a DX-20 and Hammarlund HQ100, I got on the air and in no time had 13+ wpm. It's an amazing thing that happens when you are trying to figure out what the other station is saying in a QSO and all of the sudden you realize that you code speed has increased tremendously.
Of couse, as with all things, your mileage may vary.
Quote[/b] ]For the life of me, I just can't understand why 5wpm is difficult