CANADA REPORTS AGREEMENT TO DROP MORSE

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by AA7BQ, Jan 22, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
  1. VE7RFH

    VE7RFH Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well I am an Anglo-Canadian from British Columbia, couldn't be further away either geographically or culturally from 'the french Canada' [sic]. I am a CW enthusiast but I do not support retaining Morse Code proficiency as a licensing requirement, just like 67% of all hams in Canada. And it has absolutely nothing to do with US politics or short sighted anti- anything-that-america-has or supports stuff. Get a life.
     
  2. K4JF

    K4JF Ham Member QRZ Page

    I am not familiar with Canada rules, but in the US, CW is NOT the "sole means of gaining access to the HF bands", and has not been for a long time. Therefore the comments don't apply to us in the USA.
     
  3. AC0GT

    AC0GT Ham Member QRZ Page

    Why would nobody know Morse code just because the testing is no longer required for Amateur radio?  Their are other radio services that have people trained in Morse code communications, even if they are rare.  Maritime radio still uses IMC, if rarely.  The military still has people trained in Morse code.  I'm sure many amateurs will still know Morse code even if the testing is not required.  How else will people do moonbounce if they do not know Morse code?  QRP and home brewing is not going to just disappear with the testing requirement, which are both popular with IMC enthusiasts.

    Also, given such an unlikely scenario I'm sure somebody would figure something out.  Even if it means smoke signals from a mountain top, or riding horseback with letters in a saddle bag like the Pony Express.

    I remember a quote from my textbook for a college course in networking, "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes speeding down the highway."  If Morse code is the only means of radio communication then I imagine people will abandon radio communication when other means are available to them.

    Also, if such an unlikely situation is to occur then it is likely to be temporary and after the power gets back up and the cell phone towers are repaired I would imagine every one would be happy again.  If for some reason that the situation is not so temporary then I imagine that the Amateur Radio Service would be disbanded to make room for government and business communication.

    Until there are worldwide power failures and enough RFI to kill any voice communication I am going to support the elimination of IMC testing.  While I'm waiting for the IMC testing requirement to disappear I'm going to think about what is worse, the no-code whiners or the pro-code doom-sayers. On second thought I've got better things to worry about.
     
  4. W5MJL

    W5MJL Ham Member QRZ Page

    When I earned my license the 13 word requirement was in effect.  I learned to get up to that speed in less than two weeks of study.  At that time I was totally in agreement for the code, but there was a reason.  I too, came to ham radio from the CB craze.  CB was a mess, and I wanted a clean place to talk with people who had respect for their privileges.

    Because of antenna restrictions and computers I left the hobby for almost 20 years.  I am now getting back into it.  I have now done a complete 180 on my views.  Ham radio compared to 1981 is dying.  It's dying on HF, as well as the upper bands.  

    I cannot believe so many equipment mfg's are no longer in business.  I can't believe how much radio's cost now.  All I can say is we are probably going to lose our frequencies if we don't get more people in amateur radio.  If that means getting rid of the code requirement, then so be it.  I will say this however, the code requirement should not be lifted unless the fcc is willing and able to start enforcing its own rules.
     
  5. N0KLU

    N0KLU Ham Member QRZ Page

    I do wish some of the other countries that have dropped the code requirement would weigh in. I had heard that interest in CW has increased some in a few places now that it is no longer "required". I may be wrong, but in my talking to a few it seems to have sparked an increase in Germany and one other country. That's why i wish some of the folks from those countries would comment.

    [​IMG]
     
  6. ki4hpz

    ki4hpz Ham Member QRZ Page

    FCC will keep the code. So, not to create more hams to complain about taking the waves away with BPL.
     
  7. ki4hpz

    ki4hpz Ham Member QRZ Page

    If you look at the ARRL plan, you will notive everyone gets a piece of HF. Smart on the ARRL part. Get more people complaining about BPL technology. FCC will not go for it. Soon BPL will be a go.
     
  8. KF4ZNL

    KF4ZNL Ham Member QRZ Page

    MY NAME IS KEVIN PAGE (KF4ZNL) AND I POSTED A PRO NO CODE COMMENT ON QRZ ON 22 JAN. I HAVE BEEN STUDDING SENSE JULY OF LAST YEAR TO LEARN THE CODE I FINALLY GOT THE COURAGE TO TAKE THE TEST AND I PASSED IT TODAY 22 FEB. MOTIVATED .
    IF I CAN PASS THE CODE I THINK ANYONE CAN. I JUST NEEDED A LITTLE EXTRA MOTIVATION. KY1V'S COMMENT ON 24 JAN. GAVE ME THAT .
     
  9. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Hi Kevin:

    I assume this is the extra motivation:

    Sweet deal! I'll look forward to working you on the low bands!

    For those of you who have not read Kevin's bio here on QRZ, he has MS. He chose to overcome this challenge in order to upgrade. I admire his determination.

    My sincerest congratulations to you Kevin. Your attitude and desire are very refreshing.

    73, Mike - KE4UMD
     
  10. WB6NYS

    WB6NYS Ham Member QRZ Page

    I Cannot believe all this whining over CW. Like any other mode of operation, A ham will learn it if they want to use it. No reason for it to be a "requirement" just like SSTV or RTTY ect. And as a ham said earlier, the lower HF bands sound very unprofessional now with a lot of cursing and bad mouthing. It's nearly as bad as the CB band now. Let's get over the CW thing and move forward!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page