ad: ProAudio-1

FCC Noncommital on Code Changes

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by AA7BQ, Feb 18, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 1 of 79
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: Radclub22-2
ad: abrind-2
  1. AA7BQ

    AA7BQ QRZ Founder QRZ HQ Staff QRZ Page

    Just when the FCC will act on the "Morse code" proceeding, WT Docket 05-235,
    remains hazy. The Commission released a Notice of Proposed Rule Making and
    Order (NPRM&O) last July proposing to eliminate the Element 1 (5 WPM) Morse
    code requirement for all license classes. The Amateur Radio community has
    filed more than 3800 comments on the proceeding, and additional comments
    continue to show up, even though the formal comment deadline was last
    October 31 (with reply comments by November 14). The next--and
    most-anticipated--step for the Commission is to formally adopt any revisions
    to its rules and conclude the proceeding with a Report and Order (R&O) that
    spells out the changes and specifies their effective date.

    "There really is no news," an FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau staffer
    told ARRL this week on background. "We certainly hope to release WT Docket
    05-235 sometime this year, but we're not making any predictions at this
    time. We certainly are not saving up any big announcements for Dayton
    Hamvention."

    Beyond eliminating the Morse requirement, the FCC declined proposing any
    other suggested changes to the Amateur Service.

    The proceeding began with 18 petitions for rule making--many just calling
    for the elimination of the Morse requirement but some asking for more
    far-reaching changes in the Amateur Service rules. The various petitions
    attracted a total of some 6200 comments. The FCC subsequently consolidated
    the petitions--including one from the ARRL asking the FCC to establish a new
    entry-level license class and to retain the Morse requirement only for
    Amateur Extra class applicants--into a single proceeding designated WT
    05-235.

    The FCC has not proposed extending HF privileges to current Technician
    licensees who have not passed a Morse code examination. In its NPRM&O the
    FCC suggested that in a no-Morse-requirement regime, "codeless Techs" could
    gain HF access by taking the Element 3 General class written examination.

    Any FCC decision to eliminate the 5 WPM Morse code requirement for HF access
    would have *no* impact on either the current HF CW-only subbands or on the
    CW privileges of Amateur Radio licensees.

    Before it releases an R&O on the Morse code proceeding, however, the WTB
    wants to wrap up action in another Amateur Radio-related docket--the "Phone
    Band Expansion" (or "Omnibus") NPRM in WT Docket 04-140, released April 15,
    2004. A dozen petitions for rulemaking, some dating back to 2001, were
    consolidated in the Omnibus proceeding.

    In that NPRM, the Commission proposed to go along with the ARRL's Novice
    refarming plan aimed at reallocating the current Novice/Tech Plus subbands
    and expanding portions of the 80, 40 and 15 meter phone bands. The FCC also
    agreed with an ARRL proposal to extend privileges in the current General
    CW-only HF subbands to present Novice and Tech Plus licensees (or
    Technicians with Element 1 credit). WT 04-140 further proposed to
    essentially do away with FCC rules prohibiting the manufacture and marketing
    to Amateur Radio operators of amplifiers capable of operation on 12 and 10
    meters.


    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.
     
    AA7BQ, Feb 18, 2006
    #1
  2. N4WGN

    N4WGN Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm to the point where if they drop it, they drop it and if there not going to, then dont. Just get it over with. Either way it goes the other side will just have to live with it.
     
    N4WGN, Feb 18, 2006
    #2
  3. WA2SAM

    WA2SAM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Help me out here, where it says "more efficient use of the radio spectrum", does that infer that they will be cutting back the section of each band for CW or elimenating it altogether? I say keep the CW requirement!
     
    WA2SAM, Feb 18, 2006
    #3
  4. N8DGE

    N8DGE Ham Member QRZ Page


    I agree.
     
    N8DGE, Feb 18, 2006
    #4
  5. KC2IDM

    KC2IDM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Iv worked very hard to pass the code test. leave the current license classes alone.  If anyone wants to advance to other privliges they should have to work like I did.  dont give people privliges they havent earned.
     
    KC2IDM, Feb 18, 2006
    #5
  6. K9VQ

    K9VQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    I know it is just a matter of time for CW to be illiminated, but I wish the rquirement be kept for extra class. This would set extra for something to shoot for, for generals and below. I'm also against refarming the CW portion of the bands. It are used not just for CW but the digital modes as well, which are getting more popular everyday! It is nice to be below the phone bands without all the QRM.
     
    K9VQ, Feb 18, 2006
    #6
  7. N3JBH

    N3JBH Ham Member QRZ Page

    " Kc2idm QUOTE
    Iv worked very hard to pass the code test. leave the current license classes alone. If anyone wants to advance to other privliges they should have to work like I did. dont give people privliges they havent earned. "

    your a great guy to talk about privledges you didnt earn. heck your a tech and you tooK how many questions to get there? 35 you say . heck when i became a teck there was 85 questions to get there. sounds to me like you didnt earn as much as you say. get the hell over it ok. when you took your test it was really easy. and i really doubt it ever get any easier so dont worry geeesh!!!
    and
    "kc2omo
    Help me out here, where it says "more efficient use of the radio spectrum", does that infer that they will be cutting back the section of each band for CW or elimenating it altogether? I say keep the CW re"quirement!"


    sure i agree keep the code requirment. and test for all the other modes to. Sam i am thats funny any ways sam i am a tech just like you. and proud of what i do. as my nitch is weal signal work in the vhf/uhf arena.

    but your gripe about keeping cw which i use often. is really a poor argument in my eyes. when i here folks mode j3e and splattering like crazy you know what mode j3e is?

    whats Vestigial side band? how does sread spectrum work?
    explain oliva to me. whats bpsk. qpsk and mfsk16?
    whats sc2 100. these are all modes aswell sam yet do they test for them for the tech or genral licsense? i dont think so. so i ask what the heck makes cw so darnded important then.

    thats right it is a razing routine that you must pass to be in the old mans club. i am all for testing folks but lets be real here. teach and test how to work your equipment. how to be safe with your station. how to set up your station and use it properly. why you should use a d-104 power microphone turnded wide open on 2 meter fm.

    thats what we need more fundamentals. heck folks lets test the way you should use your station safley and properly. and not worry about one mode so much.

    ok thats thats all thanks Jeff n3jbh.

    ok folks flame away. i am wearing my nomex underware.
     
    N3JBH, Feb 18, 2006
    #7
  8. N2OBM

    N2OBM Ham Member QRZ Page

    I feel it should be retained for the 'highest class' of ticket; that would infer those operators 'went the extra mile'.

    But this topic has caused such HATE..and the like, someone please make a timely decision and let's move on!
     
    N2OBM, Feb 18, 2006
    #8
  9. VE7RFH

    VE7RFH Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well, the sky has not fallen in Canada and the other countries where Morse Code proficiency has been dropped as a ham radio license requirement. I agree however, make a decision and put an end to all the endless bickering if that is possible in the world of ham radio.
     
    VE7RFH, Feb 18, 2006
    #9
  10. N7WSB

    N7WSB Ham Member QRZ Page

    I think he's kidding. I agree that it seems to be the sentiment in amateur radio however. I had to do it - so do you.

    Yes when I first got my license I had to take the novice exam - big deal. Am I a better person for it? No.

    My first computer had a kilobyte of ram - should everyone start out with the same thing? I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.
     
    N7WSB, Feb 18, 2006
    #10
  11. N7SPY

    N7SPY Ham Member QRZ Page

    It doesn't matter to me whether the requirement is eliminated because I'm learning Morse Code regardless...

    ... but leave my spectrum alone [​IMG]
     
    N7SPY, Feb 18, 2006
    #11
  12. N6BOA

    N6BOA Ham Member QRZ Page

    ...and here we go again! Come on Fred, you knew this would happen.

    73 all - enjoy.
     
    N6BOA, Feb 18, 2006
    #12
  13. N9XV

    N9XV XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    All I know is that I "earned" my 20-WPM privelages and it feels great!
     
    N9XV, Feb 18, 2006
    #13
  14. N0OV

    N0OV Guest

    Life won't be the same if they eliminate CW.

    Hey, wait a minute -- they aren't eliminating it. I can still use CW on the air.

    OK then. [​IMG]
    ----------------------
    Seriously, ditto on what they said.
     
    N0OV, Feb 18, 2006
    #14
  15. K8PBX

    K8PBX Ham Member QRZ Page

    My prediction is that the FCC will decide to keep Morse code as a testing requirement for Extra class.

    Just seems like the right thing to do.
     
    K8PBX, Feb 18, 2006
    #15
Page 1 of 79
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: QuirkyQRP-1