Morse Codes trumps SMS in head to head combat

It's ok. Don't get a headache. The point is simple. Beyond the use of HF for voice communications, there is no practical use for it "on the cutting edge" of any digital development. Yes a few folks use digital modes and have fun as they should, but none of that is "advancing the art" of digital communications as a whole. That said, the telegraphy test is a gate to HF these days. As such it is not stopping anyone from making any great digital contribution to mankind since HF is not the spectrum for such development. Get it?

On the "pot calling the kettle"...

I used the word "our" for a purpose. I acknowledge my many limitations. I won't be mad at someone for being an Astronaut just because I can't qualify. Nor would I seek to reduce the requirements for the program just so I could get in. How about you?

 

Did anyone else seem to notice that what Brittney keyed on her phone included an extra phrase from what was supposed to be transmitted?

What was supposed to be transmitted:
“Hey, girlfriend, you can text all your best pals to tell them where you are going and what you are wearing.”

What she transmitted:
"hey gf u can txt ur best pals 2 tel them wot u r doing, where ur going and wot u r wearing.”


So she added that "wot u r doing" part that was not included in the original.

I wonder if that is a typo or what? Maybe the contest should have been closer in time? *shrug*

 

CW-Where the excuses stop....
and the achievements begin
WA9TOC

 

AG4YO,
I equate CW operating with bow hunting.  They are both great hobbies within hobbies.  I can go hunting for deer with one of a number of weapons, a shotgun, a rifle, a musket, or a bow.  To get a hunting license most licensing agencies require one to show that they can safely operate all the weapons allowed by the license.  That is done one of any number of ways.  One way is to have hunters pass a safety review on all weapons they allow one to hunt with.  As in to get the license one must show they know not to blow themselves up with the powder horn while loading a musket, nor will they shoot themselves in the foot with a bow, even if they intend to only use a cartridge loaded shotgun.  Another way is to have the people qualify on the weapon they intend to use, and then they are restricted to only that weapon and only to times and places where other hunters are also using that weapon.  As such you may hear of "bow hunting season" and "rifle hunting season" in your area.  Even if the rifle hunter was tested on his ability to safely operate a bow, the hunter did not have to go to a shooting range to show he or she could hit a deer's heart from 100 meters before getting the license.

I think the same should apply to Amateur radio.  To get a license one should be tested on the ability to safely operate a radio.  Since the Amateur radio service allows one to build and modify their own radio transmitters and antennas the license should also test for a certain amount of knowledge and skill in electronics, radio propagation and the like.  However, IMC proficiency should not be the barrier to such a vast portion of the radio spectrum.

IMC testing should either be eliminated or be required only before operating CW.  Hunters are free to shoot holes in the dirt attempting to kill a deer as long as they pose no danger to themselves or other hunters, likewise a ham radio operator should be free to operate whatever mode or CW at whatever speed they feel comfortable with as long as they are not interfering with other ham's communications or posing a safety hazard.

If a ham intends to operate voice then they should not have to show the ability to understand IMC at 5 words per minute.  Just as a rifle hunter is not taken to a firing range to first show skill with a bow and arrow.  I'm not asking for Amateur license testing to be reduced, lowered or watered down.  I'm asking for Amateur license testing to better reflect the realities of modern radio communication.

You are probably right that IMC testing does not prevent the advancement of radio communication technology.  What it does do is chase people with in interest of advancing radio technology to other radio services.  The march of radio technology has changed directions from coming out of Amateur radio to the commercial services to coming from the commercial services into Amateur radio.

Let's say an engineer is investigating a means to communicate vast distances.  This is largely as a hobby, an experiment, a way to stretch the imagination and skills outside of the work week.  The engineer finds some like minded individuals across town and across the country.  They put their heads together and build and buy some radios under various different radio services and find that the radios, while necessary for the experiment, are good ways to talk and transfer data while avoiding telephone fees.  All of them are intelligent and educated and therefore are quite successful in their endeavor.  At some point they will want to see how it works at different frequencies and power outputs.  To do this legally they investigate FCC regulations so they can see how their new mode of communication compares to existing modes.  They find out they can get one of a number of radio licenses, since they have educated themselves in radio technology through their previous education, work experience, and in their experiments they are confident they can pass any requirements the FCC puts in their path to operate on the air.  Let's say they find they can get an Amateur radio license, a commercial radio license, or an experimental radio license.  The Amateur radio license requires written tests, an IMC exam, and a small testing fee.  The commercial radio license requires a written test and a filing fee.  The experimental license requires a filing of technical specifications, a short review process, and a filing fee.  Do you think these people are going to learn Morse code so they can test their radios on HF?  I doubt it.

Keeping IMC testing has become a barrier to the goals of Amateur radio.  It no longer encourages the advancement of skills in communicating and technical aspects of radio.  IMC testing no longer extends and enhances the spread of international goodwill.  It also does not enhance the ability of Amateur radio as a non-commercial and emergency radio service.  That is why I oppose the continued requirement for IMC testing in the Amateur radio service.

 

I still say it doesn't matter. Whether CW was sent by straight key, bug, mobile phone, or satellite, CW is still an outdated mode of communication. If you can send a message by CW, you can send the same message 50 times faster by any other mode of communication with the technology available today. I had to learn CW to get my ticket 30 years ago, but I do not and will not live in the dark ages for all eternity! WHO CARES??

 

I'm reluctant to call anything outdated.  IMC has its use although its lost its place as a vital skill in radio communication.  It's still used in hand sent code although mostly now by light by soldiers in the field and sailors at sea.  Using IMC by light has the ability to send arbitrary information by line of sight with little chance of being intercepted like radio or sound, which can travel beyond the horizon.  CW, or perhaps more accurately called on-off keying, is still used in modern communications.  I've read of people using and experimenting with OOK, instead of using IMC they are using time shift keying.  As many hams are aware people use high speed CW for activities like meteor scatter, where the IMC speed is much too high to be sent by hand or received by ear.

IMC has its place in modern communications.  It has an elegant simplicity that cannot be matched.  Where it doesn't have a place is as a testing requirement for Amateur testing.  People are free to use it if they like and I believe they will as long as the Amateur Radio Service exists.

What I fail to understand is why so many people are opposed to the elimination of IMC testing.  Are they afraid that people will flock to the air waves?  God forbid that they actually have someone new to talk to.  Besides, many have stated that Amateur radio has lost its popularity to cell phones and the internet.  Are they afraid that its just one step closer to the elimination of the written tests?  That's never going to happen and they know it.  The FCC is not about to hand over the ability to operate a 1500 watt transmitter to anyone that can write down their name.  The FCC already gets pissed at people that operate a 5 watt GMRS HT without a license.

It took me a while but I've figured it out.  What the IMC testing advocates fear is change.  Times change and if Amateur radio doesn't change with it then expect it to die off like the dinosaurs.

 

Is the relative slowness of text messaging a problem with the limited keyboard entry, and not the technology?

Suppose a single Morse "button" were added to the keypad and firmware programmed to change Morse to text characters. Someone with a good "finger" might beat multiple-tap entry every time. Sure would produce some good teenagers with good Morse timing!

BTW, there is one cell phone that has a tiny dedicated key for each letter:Fast Tap

 

I knew it wouldn't be long before they turned this topic into a code/no-code debate. Lets hear some Echolink opinions as long as your at it!!!


Tom kcØw

 

Rumor has it that a similar occurance will happen on Leno tonight - 13 May 05, a pair of Amateurs v. teens with text.

73, w2dsx

 

Although I have carefully explained how this is wrong, in ignorance of the facts, you are of course free to hold on to your fanatical and unsubstantiated view.

Using your silly logic, lets shoot you in the head. You're going to die one day anyway, right? Lets kill all old people because they're "outdated". Times change, right? Get with it! LOL. The "change" argument is the key to making a person with a weak argument look smart. Whoever argues with change is old, useless, not with it, right? ROFL! God gave us brains to make up our own minds, not be mindlessly attached to what other people decide "change" should be.

 

Thats because whenever someone posts something remotely flattering to telegraphy some mushroom headed no coder feels compelled to show his rear end. It's like if they let one thing get by the FCC might see it and let the requirement stand. Then they'd have to pass the telegraphy test like hundreds of thousands of other Amateurs. LOL.

 

I'm not advocating change for the sake of change.  I think the testing requirements should change to reflect the current state of the art of radio.

You claim to have carefully explained the reasons for keeping the IMC testing requirement.  The best I can tell is you think it should stay because it doesn't hurt the hobby and because it somehow advances the "art" of radio communication.  How do you substantiate those claims?

Is there a rule or law that requires one to actually use their knowledge of IMC?  The only requirement I am aware of is the test itself, but why test if there is no technical or legal limitation that would prevent a ham from operating successfully with either a microphone or keyboard?

The IMC test proves nothing about the Amateur radio license applicant besides the ability to understand IMC by ear.  The FCC has stated those words nearly verbatim in previous public statements.  The IARU, of which the ARRL is a member, voted unanimously in favor of the elimination of IMC proficiency requirements for Amateur radio licensing.  AG4YO, you appear to be in the minority position on the IMC testing debate.

The reason I originally spoke up on this thread was because some one pointed this "race" as proof the FCC would not eliminate IMC testing.  That doesn't make sense, if that is true then you'd think the FCC would require IMC testing before allowing someone to get long-distance telephone service or internet access.  What if I had a race that showed typing an e-mail was faster than both T9/SMS and IMC/CW, does that mean the FCC will replace radios with wired computers?  Of course not, each means of communication has its pros and cons.  The reason we have so many ways to communicate is because of the merits of each mode.

Like I said before, I'm not the smartest person in the world, so could you please explain to me in terms I can understand why we should keep IMC testing for Amateur licensing?  Perhaps a bulleted list would be helpful, a point on each line.  While you are at it could you please explain why the Amateur Radio Service is the only FCC service that requires IMC testing for access to frequencies (HF) and not a mode (CW)?  That is something that truly confounds me.

 

I just received a note saying that on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno (5/13), there will be message demonstration between a text-messaging team and a Morse Code team. Check your local listings.

Paul, N0JAA.

 

Yep, I hope the demo on Leno comes out as well as the one in Australia.

Who knows, some kids who are tired of sending messages the old, slow way might decide that Morse is cool. To them, it is new and "fresh". This will be the first time anybody's really done Morse Code on a national TV show that I can remember. I vaguely remember Andy Devine getting on the air during his show a few decades ago, but that was decades ago.

Too bad they aren't doing it on The Daily Show, which has a much younger audience than Leno.

 

You state IMC testing is not needed for several reasons and I explained that the reasons used were not correct. Now you ask me to prove why testing is needed. LOL. Another no-coder ploy I see often. They sit back and want pro-coders to prove to them that testing is needed. Testing is the rule, my friend. You need to prove why it should be removed, not ask me to prove why it should not be. Nice try.

You want to take your points one at a time and discuss them, I will respond.