FILE COMMENTS WHERE THEY COUNT

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by WA3VJB, Jul 29, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
  1. WA4GCH

    WA4GCH Ham Member QRZ Page

    (Plus an interesting one about an attempted renewal of a license in 2004 when the licensee was deceased in 2000.) Hmmmmmmm

    That one was REALY good he even had sent the obituary ! What a DOPE! [​IMG]
     
  2. K4JF

    K4JF Ham Member QRZ Page

    I thought it was hilarious!! Especially the part about if you are really deceased, please send in your license!! [​IMG]
     
  3. kc8clj

    kc8clj Ham Member QRZ Page

    To Whom It May Concern

    It's been brought to my attention that you are seeking comments on the elimination of Morse Code as a requirement for HF radio operations in the United States. In my opinion with the technologies available today, Morse Code has become an outdated mode of communication. Times and technology have changed dramatically over the years, and the previous reasons for requiring Morse Code proficiency of all amateur radio operators were dropped by the ITU during "WRC-03". Many of the government or commercial radio services no longer use Morse Code in today’s world. The historical need of the government, commercial, and maritime services for a “pool of (Morse Code) trained operators” has ceased to exist. The need for the Morse Code skills is no longer required for effective emergency communications by amateur operators.

    The requirement of Morse Code proficiency for any amateur radio license is no longer in accord with the purpose of the amateur radio service and serves no legitimate regulatory purpose. The Morse Code requirement seems to be contrary to one of the commission’s statutory mandates. The IARU recognized that continuing Morse Code requirements for HF operation is not in the best interest of the future of the amateur radio service. Since the United State's administration is no longer bound by a requirement in the ITU Radio Regulations it can, and should, act promptly to remove an unnecessary, restrictive requirement. Other administrations around the World has already eliminated the Morse Code requirement for HF operation. I feel it will not be long before other administrations around the World will follow in their footsteps eliminating the Morse Code testing for HF operation. I would like to see the administration of the United States to act on this issue as well.  

    It has been the Commission’s own determination, as well as comments from the public, during the proceedings in both 1990 and 1999, as referenced in the NCI Petition, it's clear that a Morse Code proficiency test requirement is unnecessary and undesirable, in that:
    It does not comport with the basis and purpose of the Amateur Radio Service.
    It acts as a barrier to entry or advancement to otherwise qualified persons.
    It is not necessarily indicative of an individual's ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art.
    It does not provide any indication of the examinee's good character, high intelligence, cooperative demeanor, or willingness to comply with the Commission’s rules.
    It no longer continues to serve a regulatory purpose.
    It otherwise does not serve the public interest and necessity.

    The administration of the United States has the authority to amend Part 97 rules, to eliminate Morse Code proficiency requirements by expedited order, without formal notice and public input. By granting NCI’s Petition, a burden on applicants for amateur radio licenses would be removed, no additional requirement would be imposed, and therefore no party or other person would be prejudiced by the administration's Part 97.

    The Commission should refrain from combining NCI’s request for the prompt elimination of the Morse Code test requirements from its rules with other substantially unrelated issues such as, but not limited to, band segmentation, changes in the number of license classes, sweeping changes in operator privileges by license class, etc., because that would result in a delay in resolving this important and clear-cut issue.

    In summary, for all of the reasons outlined and referenced herein, the administration of the United States should enact the following changes to its rules in the most expeditious manner possible:

    Eliminate the “Element 1” Morse Code test totally from the administration of the United States rules for all license classes. Since the only testing distinction between the Technician class and the (grandfathered) Technician Plus class is the “Element 1” Morse Code Test, modify, as a consequential and logical change, the privileges afforded to Technician class licensees to be equivalent to those currently afforded to Technician Plus licensees and “Technician with Morse credit” licensees



    Respectfully submitted,
    Allen T. Bare Jr. - KC8CLJ
     
  4. KH2D

    KH2D Ham Member QRZ Page

    To Whom It May Concern

    It's been brought to my attention that you are seeking comments on the elimination of Morse Code as a requirement for HF radio operations in the United States.


    "Whom", in this case, would be the FCC and not QRZ.Com. You need to file that on the other web site....

    73, Jim KH2D
     
  5. N2MTB

    N2MTB Ham Member QRZ Page

    Why don't they just have a test for all bands/modes that you wish to operate on?...like a driver license...I have all endorsements available on mine....should I look down on all the higher class hams because they don't??...no, and I won't stoop to their level...all this bravo sierra makes me want to tear up my ticket and get rid of my junk. If they think they are better than anyone else because they know CW then they can have the goddamn bands. I don't need to spend more money on gear just to listen to gramps talk about the WAY IT WAS WAY BACK WHEN........
     
  6. WA3KYY

    WA3KYY Ham Member QRZ Page

    We already do, it's the written test  [​IMG]   It doesn't take any significant skill to talk into a microphone or type on a keyboard.  It does take a significant skill to decode morse code by ear or send it with a straight key or paddles.  The vast majority of CW operators do it this way.  Even during contests most receiving is done by ear even if most sending is automated, but automated sending has been around since the 70s.

    Please note:  I am talking only about the minimum skill necessary to operate the mode, not proper operating procedures for each mode.  Each mode does indeed have a set of procedures that must be learned but these are also not, IMO, anywhere near the level of learning needed to just operate on CW.  These procedures can be and are tested on the written exams.  But the only way you can test for the ability to use morse code is by a receiving and sending test.  Therefore, I believe morse code testing should be retained for the Extra Class license since most of the additional frequencies are in the segments where CW is almost the only mode ever used.

    I would even go further and suggest that the phone band allocations be realinged to give Extra and Advanced the bottom 25KHz and expand the General portion to include what is now the Advanced segment.  This would provide the additional phone space we are likely to need and strengthen the justification for a morse code test for Extra.

    73,
    Mike WA3KYY
     
  7. K1LWI

    K1LWI Ham Member QRZ Page

    comments to fcc they count.NO [​IMG]
     
  8. K4TEH

    K4TEH Ham Member QRZ Page

    I read the whole thing, and it was very enlightening. Basically, only change is elimination of Morse Code.
    No auto upgrades from Tech (or Novice, Tech Plus) to General.
    No General to Extra.
    No Adv to Extra.
    No changes to the test question pool.

    I am disappointed I won't get the auto up to Gen, but I am laaaazy. Guess I will have to brush off that Gen study book. Dammet!  

    Actually I agree with the FCC - in that Tech's are not tested in the operation of an amateur station on HF.

    Power to the new no code Generals!

    /r
    Chip
    KB3LVK
     
  9. N2MMM

    N2MMM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Actually, many people are advocating that the question pool be changed to make the license more difficult to get concurrently with the end of code testing so your study guide might become obsolete and you may be holding a worthless CSCE if you take the General test before the change.
     
  10. AC0GT

    AC0GT Ham Member QRZ Page

    The FCC has taken a hands off approach to the question pools so I doubt the CSCE will be worthless as long as it has not expired, which it will not do for one year after it has been taken.

    The current General question pool isn't scheduled to be revised until 2008, but the Extra will be revised in 2006. I suspect that after the NPRM becomes rule there will be a focus on updating the question pools to reflect the rule changes, and to make the test more appropriate. If that means increasing the difficulty then so be it.

    I don't understand this desire to make the tests more difficult for the sake of making them more difficult. Radio theory, RF propagation, FCC regulations and the like should not be difficult for any one that graduated high school. If the questions are made so difficult that a person would need a Master of Engineering degree to pass then I would question the appropriateness of the test to the privileges gained. But that's just IMHO.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page