Morse Code Eliminated by FCC

Get used to it folks, the FCC has made a ruling. We can discuss that ruling forever.....Dosen't change a thing. With no incentives for class licenseing, make it one license title. Do the best we can to assure GOOD radio operations. The only winners here after this ruling are the sellers of equipment.

The next rule change will be beyond your fears. Live with what we have until that one comes down.

Everyone has an opinion, just throwing this one in for whatever it may worth....think positive!! Welcome new operators and guide them into clean operators.

"nuff sed" 73 W7HW Duane Silverton, OR

 

I'm sorry to break it to you Russ but morse code never has been unique to radio, it wasn't even decoded by the tones in the old days but rather by paper tapes and keyclicks by the advanced operators of the wired line.
I'm always laughing when someone calls it a language, it's a alphabet not a language, the language is the abriviations and q-codes etc. and they can and are used in keyboard modes aswel.

The argument that you can't use the CW portions without knowing morsecode is false because they are defined as CW/digital portions, as of 15 december US hams can even send narowband (<500hz) fax/sstv in those bands.

 

Russ,

Thanks for the compliment. You summed up my point quite well. As for your thoughts on what the definition of Radio Operator should be, I see your point, but I find myself with this dilemma:

No argument - there was a time when a working knowledge of Morse code was essential, if not the very essence of being a Radio Operator. Is it still essential? Maybe, maybe not. I agree that Morse is a unique communications technique, however I'm not so sure that it's an essential skill one must posses in order to be recognized as a Radio Operator today. In the general scheme of things, most essential radio traffic nowadays is handled via other techniques.

One could make the argument that the ability to troubleshoot digital interfaces is a more essential skill for a modern Radio Operator. After all - in an emergency, which is the more likely thing that a modern Radio Operator would have to deal with - having to use code, or having to quickly solve an issue with a computer-assisted radio link? Even the Maritime Mobile Service made that choice a while back, and they were one of the last commercial services where a code key could be found.

Maybe a better analogy would be my pilot reference: Pilots are no longer required to show proficiency in spin recovery. Not that a pilot won't ever get into a spin - it's just not required for the license anymore. However, they are still considered pilots, nonetheless. Of course, the reasoning behind the decision was one of safety & liability - too many student pilots & instructors getting killed while practicing spin recovery - which is admittedly far removed from the reasoning behind the FCC's decision to eliminate the testing of Morse proficiency. However, I still believe the comparison is a logical one from the perspective of what constitutes a Radio Operator.

As far as the code goes, yes - I am fully aware of the role Morse code has played in Amateur Radio - both from a technical perspective, and also from the fraternal "rite of passage" perspective. I share your hopes that there will always be enough interest in code to keep it alive.

I strongly believe that it is important to understand where we came from in order to fully appreciate where we are today, and to intelligently plan for the future.

As for changing the name, I'm reminded of the classic line from Shakespeare's Romeo & Juliet: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other word would smell as sweet."

Regardless of the name - I will still garner great enjoyment from communicating with others via Ham radio - of this I am sure!

It's great that we can discuss this in a logical, non-emotional manner. I appreciate your professionalism, Russ.

I hope to work you on the bands someday!

Cheers & 73!

Joel - N0NCO

 

You should get your dictionary out and look up the word language then you will understand why you are mistaken. Like many words language has more than one meaning. Did you know that Algebra is a language. It's a non verbal means of communicating ideas. Do a little more research. It's no wonder you are confused. And to say that morse is not the language of radio ignores history. We speak English in our country. It is the language of our country. I guess you think therefore we were the first to use the English language. I know you are just trying to be funny. You cant be serious. The fact that this does not make for a good argument to retain the code test is not my point. I guess the one analogy you could make to support your position is that you dont have to speak English in order to be an American - or do you?

Russ

 

No mention of an alphabatic code being discribed as a language.
Mathamatical language falls indeed under 1. as a systematic means of comunication. trying to put morse code under that fails because it is just a set of symbols without underlaying systematics, the same as the latin alphabet.

morse code was the first transmition mode used on radio but radio was not the first medium used for morse code, that is a part of history you keep ignoring.

what you call English is just a dialect, but that is besides the point here, what matters is that the language of radio is the use of shorthands and codes, those are not limited to any single mode.

A better analogy would be if you have to be able to write English to be an American and from the number of US analphabetics I think it is safe to conclude you don't have to be able to write.

Please research the differense between language and alphabets.

 

We've been through this before, at length. Morse code is an alphabet, not a language. If it was a language, a German could readily communicate with an American, using only morse code. But they can't.

A German CAN send a text to an American, and he can copy it down, not even knowing a word of what it says. If he hands it to another German, he will be able to read it with no problem.

If morse code is a language, then "typewritten" is also a language; but it's not.

Joe

 

I for one am going to continue learning code. I started 11 years ago in the Navy, before I was told to stop, as the requirement know code was dropped. I enjoyed it then and now for its music like quality. Now that I have the resources to learn I will not stop. If the FCC says I do not need it then so be it. I say I need it. So I will learn it and use it. If it speeds up the process to get on the bands by not having the code test then I will use it to my advantage to hear it and to try my hand at responding. Yes it is an end to a sanctioned era, but not the entire era. IMHO
73 KI4REX

 

You are either naive or smarter than you appear and are trying to be naive. I dont know which it is. Do you know what an alphabet is. An alphabet is a system of signs or symbols (dits and dahs) by which a language is conceived. In learning the English language you probably learned your  A B C's. Think back to when you were in first grade. It may help you in your arguments. If you dont know the language of radio you cant be considered a radio operator unless of course you believe a soccer mom listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio while driving her new SUV to practice is a radio operator. This is too easy.

Russ

 

Again you make some good points and I agree with some of your assertions. I would also enjoy working you in the wonderful world of short wave radio.

73 Russ

 

If that's meant to be a question, the last symbol should be '?' rather than '.'.

And yes, I do know what an alphabet is.

And that's not it.

No apostrophe necessary. That's a plural, not a possessive.

That's "don't". The apostrophe is required in a contraction.

I correct your typography to make a point: The alphabet used in a language is not the language. The interrogative sign and apostrophe are part of the English language but not part of the Latin alphabet.

Nor does an alphabet define a language: Is "CCCP" an English acronym? No. The letters, although I abuse latin-1 to write them, aren't even in the Latin alphabet. They're Cyrillic and from Russian. The sentence "Je n'est ce pas." uses the same Latin alphabet as this English text does, but is definitely not an English sentence.

Nor do all languages even have alphabets. The language which has the most primary speakers in the world today is Mandarin Chinese and its dialects. Mandarin has no alphabet.

In its simplest meaning, "Morse code" is one of many ways to encode the Latin alphabet and a handful of typographic symbols, mostly punctuation marks. It is an encoding.

But even in the sense that people who prefer to call Morse code a "language" mean "Morse code", that is, an encoding and a set of procedures using it, including certain abbreviations, it is still not a language. It is a means of encoding that can be used to encode many different languages.

".--- . / -. .----. . ... - / -.-. . / .--. .- ... .-.-.- " is perfectly valid Morse code. But it's not English, and if you don't happen to speak French you won't know what it means.

In case you do speak French, let me make the example in a language you are less likely to speak. "-. .. / .... .- --- / -- .- ..--.." Feel free to answer it, preferably in Arabic, using Morse code.

 

Thanks for the comic relief Hi HI. You should however take up your difference with what the meaning of an alphabet and language is with Mr. Webster and not me. Your arguing with the wrong guy.

You do realize though you look desperate and hopeless in your arguments. I must say you are doing your best but having to try and split hairs in order to  explain your case - guys it looks bad.  No you are being required  to split not human hair but frog hair (much finer) and then quartering those hairs again to try and make your position suitable to counter my proposition.  Try and broaden your vision. It will make for a more impressive presentation of your position. Minutia on this dosent make your point more persuasive unless you are trying to argue with a language professor. Having said that allow me try to put this in a manner you may see more clearly.  If it helps you to grasp the concept (thats what you are missing here)  lets use the term vernacular. Lets say that Morse code is the vernacular language of radio. Is that more agreeable. I hope so.

If you cant copy the language of radio it's hard to see how you are a radio operator. Watching a computer screen as digital messages are decode by a piece of equipment dosent make for a radio operator. I think more people could be sold on joining the "Association of Digital Communicators" than Amateur Radio. Throw out the test to attrack the geek squad and throw out the term radio to do the same. Think about it. You know it's true.

I guess you guys are the marketing experts. Maybe you know best.

Russ

 

Marty is absolutely right. Morse code IS a code, by definition. That code represents letters of our alphabet, or other punctuation and numbers. But it is not a language, by definition.

The ONLY meaning associated with morse code is a cross connection to an associated letter, number, or punctuation mark. If morse is a language, then so is your keyboard. If I type "pan", it means something in the English language. It also means something in Spanish, but the two meanings are totally different. Morse code itself carries no meaning if the letters encoded are not in a language that is understood, even if the characters are sent and received with 100% accuracy.

If morse was a language, any two people that understood morse should be able to communicate using only morse. But they can't.

Two people that understand written English can communicate, but two people that understand morse can't necessarily communicate.

Joe

 

You are the one desperatly holding on to the notion that Morse Code is a language Russ.

Yes it played a big part in the early history when the only mode technicaly available was CW but they could have used any other code that rendered itself to on/off keying but fortunatly for samual morse his code was already widely used.

Personaly I have a much higher regard for Marcony and Herz, they where the first ham radio operators and they wheren't even interested in comunicating, they where experimentors, the most basic part of hamradio in my opinion but that is just mine and I don't get upset if anyone disagrees.

 

Ok I will give you the last word on the matter. I think we understand each others position. I too love the history of Hertz, Marconi, De Forest, Fessenden, and Armstrong.

73 Russ

 

Ok Joe you can have the last word on the issue. QSL your position on language.

73 and hope to see you on HF.

Russ